**ExxonMobil Files Federal Lawsuit Challenging California’s Greenhouse Gas Reporting Laws**
ExxonMobil has filed a lawsuit in federal court challenging two California laws that require the oil giant to report the greenhouse gas emissions resulting from the use of its products worldwide.
The company submitted a 30-page complaint on Friday in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California. ExxonMobil argues that these laws violate its First Amendment free speech rights by compelling it to “trumpet California’s preferred message even though ExxonMobil believes the speech is misleading and misguided.”
—
**Overview of the California Climate Legislation**
Senate Bill 253, known as the Climate Corporate Data Accountability Act of 2023, mandates the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to adopt regulations this year. These regulations require public and private companies with over $1 billion in annual revenue to publicly disclose their greenhouse gas emissions across three different “scopes”:
– **Scope 1:** Direct greenhouse gas emissions from the company and its branches.
– **Scope 2:** Indirect emissions, such as electricity purchased by the company.
– **Scope 3:** Emissions from the company’s supply chain, including waste, water usage, business travel, and employee commutes. Notably, these account for about 75% of a company’s greenhouse gas emissions in many industries.
Reporting on Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions will begin in 2026, with Scope 3 reporting starting in 2027.
—
**ExxonMobil’s Objections**
According to the lawsuit, the Air Resources Board solicited public input during the rule-making process but has yet to respond to ExxonMobil’s September 5 letter, which detailed its objections to the proposed reporting methods.
ExxonMobil contends that the legislative history reveals the laws aim to unfairly single out companies like ExxonMobil “for being large” and to spur public criticism. The complaint states, “California may believe that companies that meet the statutes’ revenue thresholds are uniquely responsible for climate change, but the First Amendment categorically bars it from forcing ExxonMobil to speak in service of that misguided viewpoint.”
—
**Expert and Legislative Perspectives**
Michael Gerrard, a prominent climate change legal expert at Columbia University, commented, “These laws do not require Exxon to make any changes in the way it produces, transports, refines or sells oil. They are just about information that Exxon doesn’t want to provide to the public.” He continued, “If Exxon thinks any of the information would be misleading, it’s free to explain why so that readers can draw their own conclusions.”
Supporters of the legislation argue it discourages corporate greenwashing—the practice of falsely portraying a company’s efforts to reduce climate emissions. Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco), the bill’s author, stated at the time of adoption, “We need the full picture to make the deep emissions cuts that scientists tell us are necessary to avert the worst impacts of climate change.”
—
**Additional Legislation and Legal Challenges**
Another related bill, Senate Bill 261, requires corporations with revenues over $500 million to disclose their climate-related financial risks. In its lawsuit, ExxonMobil claims this law would force it “to engage in granular conjecture about unknowable future developments and to publicly disseminate that speculation on its website.”
—
**Defendants Named in the Lawsuit**
The lawsuit names as defendants California Attorney General Rob Bonta, Air Resources Board Chair Lauren Sanchez, Executive Officer Steven S. Cliff, and two officials from the Board’s Industrial Strategies Division.
—
Neither the Attorney General’s office nor ExxonMobil responded to requests for comment on Saturday. The case is expected to bring significant attention to the intersection of climate policy, corporate responsibility, and free speech rights.
https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2025-10-25/exxonmobil-lawsuit-california-greenhouse-emissions
Be First to Comment