Boulder—the land where kombucha flows like water, and the city council believes they’re the moral compass for the entire state. In their latest episode of eco-theater, the Colorado Supreme Court has greenlit a lawsuit allowing Boulder and Boulder County to drag ExxonMobil and Suncor through the legal wringer over alleged climate change damages. Because, apparently, when the weather gets weird, it’s Exxon’s fault, not the result of living in a state where snow in May is just part of the charm. (Big Pivots)
Let’s unpack this judicial circus.
The Lawsuit: A Local Issue or a Global Power Play?
Boulder’s lawsuit, filed in 2018, claims that Exxon and Suncor knowingly contributed to climate change and misled the public about the dangers of fossil fuels. They argue that these companies should foot the bill for local climate-related damages like wildfires and droughts. (Reuters)
But here’s the kicker: climate change is a global phenomenon. Trying to pin local climate impacts solely on two companies is like blaming your hangover on the guy who sold you the tequila, ignoring the six shots you took.
The Court’s Decision: A Green Light for Judicial Activism
In a 5-2 decision, the Colorado Supreme Court ruled that Boulder’s claims are not preempted by federal law and can proceed in state court. (Need I remind you that this is the same scandal-ridden group of black-robed, un-elected activists that thought they had the power to throw a duly nominated presidential candidate off the ballot, only to be smacked down 9-0 by the US Supreme Court?!) Justice Richard Gabriel, writing for the majority, stated, “A lawsuit does not amount to regulation merely because it might have an impact on how actors in a given field behave.” (CBS News)
Translation: We’re not regulating; we’re just suing you into submission.
Justice Carlos Samour Jr., joined by Justice Brian Boatright, dissented, warning that this decision could lead to “regulatory chaos.” He wrote, “We are but one indivisible nation. Yet, the majority in this case gives Boulder, Colorado, the green light to act as its own republic.”
Amen, Justice Samour. Boulder acting like its own republic? Next thing you know, they’ll be printing their own currency—probably with Greta Thunberg’s face on it. (Center for Climate Integrity)
The Bigger Picture: When Courts Become Policy Makers
This lawsuit is part of a broader trend where progressive municipalities, unable to push their agendas through elected legislatures, turn to the courts to achieve their policy goals. It’s a classic end-run around democracy.
By allowing this case to proceed, the Colorado Supreme Court has effectively opened the floodgates for similar lawsuits across the country. It’s a dangerous precedent that blurs the lines between judicial and legislative powers.
The Consequences: Higher Costs, Lower Accountability
If Boulder succeeds, the costs won’t just hit Exxon and Suncor; they’ll trickle down to consumers in the form of higher energy prices. And for what? To fund Boulder’s utopian vision of a carbon-free future, complete with solar-powered yoga studios (the solar panels sited in WELD COUNTY, of course, because icky, who wants to look at solar panels?!) and organic kale farms.
Meanwhile, the real issues—like forest management, infrastructure resilience, and emergency preparedness—get sidelined in favor of virtue-signaling lawsuits.
A Cautionary Tale of Judicial Overreach
Boulder’s lawsuit is less about seeking justice and more about enforcing a progressive agenda through the courts. It’s a textbook example of how judicial activism can undermine democratic processes and lead to unintended consequences.
As Justice Samour aptly put it, “We are but one indivisible nation.” It’s time for Boulder to remember that—and stop acting like its own eco-kingdom.
Let’s hope the higher courts see through this charade and restore some sanity to the legal system.
Share your thoughts...