Today, a handful of cities and counties went before the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in an attempt to revive the failing climate litigation campaign. In its curtain-raising story for the hearings, the Los Angeles Times called on reporter Susanne Rust to set the stage for its readers, without disclosing that she led the Rockefeller-funded reporting project that manufactured the original “Exxon Knew” controversy and led to today’s hearing.
The municipalities are arguing that these cases belong in state court, when in fact – according to U.S. District Court Judge William Alsup – they have no place in the judiciary at all.
In dismissing San Francisco and Oakland’s case in 2018, Alsup explained:
“The problem deserves a solution on a more vast scale than can be supplied by a district judge or jury in a public nuisance case. While it remains true that our federal courts have authority to fashion common law remedies for claims based on global warming, courts must also respect and defer to the other co-equal branches of government when the problem at hand clearly deserves a solution best addressed by those branches. The Court will stay its hand in favor of solutions by the legislative and executive branches. For the reasons stated, defendants’ motion to dismiss is GRANTED.” (emphasis added)
The two cases up for appeal have the potential to either shut down the climate litigation campaign once and for all or open the door for other cities to file frivolous litigation against America’s energy producers.
At the Heart of the “Exxon Knew” Campaign
The LA Times played a key role in laying the groundwork of the “Exxon Knew” campaign. Susanne Rust, the author of today’s climate litigation article, previously led the Energy and Environment Reporting Project at the Columbia School of Journalism in its 2015 investigation into ExxonMobil’s climate research. Their reports were published by the LA Times in October of that year and were later cited in support of the cases filed against energy producers.
At the time, neither Columbia’s fellowship program, nor the LA Times disclosed that that their investigation was bought and paid for by the Rockefeller Brothers Fund and Rockefeller Family Fund, the two major organizations behind the climate litigation campaign. In 2016, the Rockefeller Family Fund even hosted a strategy session at their headquarters in New York to “delegitimize” energy companies and explore additional legal actions, including pursuing tort cases such as those before the Ninth Circuit today.
After an Energy In Depth investigation into this lack of disclosure, the LA Times and Columbia quietly updated one of the stories to disclose the report’s funding to its readers.
An Activist Credit Reel
Susanne Rust’s latest piece highlights her continued connections with this activist echo chamber. She leads the piece with an extensive quote from Richard Wiles – arguably the nexus of today’s climate litigation campaign. Funded by powerful billionaires like the Rockefellers, Wiles’ Center for Climate Integrity (CCI) is responsible for putting up billboards, social media campaigns, hiring a lobbyist to arrange meetings between city officials and plaintiffs’ attorneys and submitting an amicus brief in support of an ongoing climate case.
In the piece, Rust also calls on Sean Hecht, co-executive director UCLA’s Emmett Institute, to weigh in on the impending cases. Hecht “has connections” to these cases and has been a vocal proponent of the climate change litigation movement. His co-executive director Cara Horowitz helped brief several state attorneys general offices on litigation in 2016 and hosted discussions about their viability with the Union of Concerned Scientists. In addition, fellow Emmett Institute faculty member Ann Carlson serves as a consultant for Sher Edling LLP on these climate cases and recently appeared besides Vic Sher, the lead plaintiffs’ attorney at Sher Edling, at a CCI-hosted event in Hawaii. Sher Edling is representing all of the municipalities in today’s climate hearings on a contingency fee basis.
Unsurprisingly, Rust’s story is being heavily promoted on social media by the climate litigation activist echo chamber. Sher Edling, anti-energy researcher Naomi Oreskes, and CCI have all given accolades to the piece.
Conclusion
Like her original reporting that spawned the “Exxon Knew” campaign and her friendly preview of activists’ desperate attempt to distract from their losing case in New York last year, Rust continues to promote the anti-energy activists’ agenda.
