Activists once said that a lawsuit filed in an oil and gas state would be the “cherry on top” of the climate campaign’s efforts. And just a year after Bucks County, Pennsylvania strategized behind closed doors and launched its lawsuit, that cherry has been knocked right off. 

Late on Friday, Bucks County Judge Stephen Corr dismissed the county’s misguided climate lawsuit against major oil and gas companies with prejudice – the legal equivalent to “don’t try this again.”  

As Judge Corr made clear: 

“…today we join a growing chorus of state and federal courts across the United States. singing from the same hymnal, in concluding that the claims raised by Bucks County are not judiciable by any state court in Pennsylvania.” [emphasis added] 

The decision mirrors a wave of similar rulings across the country, where courts have rightly rejected attempts to shift national environmental policymaking to local courthouses. In New Jersey, New York City, Maryland, and now Pennsylvania, judges are drawing a line in the sand: state courts aren’t a place to wage war on emissions. 

A Case on Emissions  

Despite Bucks County’s claim that the suit wasn’t about regulating emissions, Judge Corr was not convinced. As he pointed out in the dismissal, the word “emissions” is used more than 100 times in the complaint, whereas “deceptive” and “deception” are used 39 times combined.  

Citing the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ruling that affirmed dismissal of New York City’s first climate lawsuit, Judge Corr said that no amount of clever legal phrasing can hide the fact that the case is fundamentally about global emissions:  

“Artful pleading cannot transform [Bucks County’s] Complaint into anything other than a suit over global greenhouse gas emissions.” 

That’s the fatal flaw – state courts can’t regulate interstate emissions, as Judge Corr made crystal clear:  

“The reason Bucks County avoids the issue of emissions is obvious, there is no question that emissions are the sole province of the federal government through the CAA and EPA regulations that flow from it.” [emphasis added] 

A Sneaky Agenda  

Beyond the substantive claims, Corr also took issue with how the suit itself was filed. When the case was filed in August 2024, EID Climate pointed out transparency issues with the filing, including no notification to the public, no public commit period, and no transparent public record. These concerns eventually were called out in court. 

During tense oral arguments in March, Judge Corr called the case “sneaky.” And on Friday, he went so far as to say Commissioners violated the spirit of the state’s transparency laws. 

The Commissioners green-lit the lawsuit behind closed doors before its filing—a process that included no public discussion or awareness, no debate, and certainly no transparency: 

“The citizens of Bucks County did not elect the Commissioners to conduct fast public meetings: rather, the citizens of Bucks County elected the Commissioners to hold transparent and informative public meetings… It seems obvious to this Court that… their use of the “Consent Agenda” particularly in this instance, violates the spirit of the Sunshine Act.” [emphasis added] 

And, as local outlet LevittownNow points out: 

“In his written decision, Corr called the hiring of the law firm a ‘cryptic summary’ of the agenda and noted the lack of public discussion or commissioner comment on it prior to the filing.” 

By violating the spirit of Sunshine Act, the Bucks County Commissioners chose to value misguided claims over providing transparency to its citizens.  

Pennsylvania Isn’t Buying It 

This is just the latest rejection of climate lawfare in Pennsylvania. In April 2024, the Center for Climate Integrity (CCI) pitched its activist playbook to Allegheny County just as Bucks County’s move backfired and Pittsburgh-area business leaders pushed back hard. 

Judge Corr’s decision leaves little room for misinterpretation: Pennsylvania isn’t the battleground for billionaire-funded climate litigation. While the wealthy Philly suburb has recently been labeled “the new Hamptons” – drawing supermodel Gigi Hadid, actor Bradley Cooper, and the hometown of pop star Sabrina Carpenter – Pennsylvania still isn’t the place to play courtroom games with our energy future.  

This is a natural gas state – plain and simple. Even the Democratic attorney general nominee denounced a lawsuit last year, stating punishing companies “is not going to get us there” on climate. And Republican Bucks County Commissioner Gene DiGirolamo quickly backed off the county’s misguided lawsuit.  

In Pennsylvania, gas rules – and that’s something folks on both sides of the aisle understand. 

Bottom Line: Judge Corr’s no-nonsense dismissal of Buck County’s climate suit wake-up call: these lawsuits aren’t about justice, they’re about agendas – cooked up behind closed doors, pushed by deep-pocketed outsiders, and aimed squarely at U.S energy producers. In Pennsylvania, at least, that strategy just hit a brick wall.