Boom: Nuisance New Jersey Lawsuit Against Oil Companies Tossed - With Prejudice

Lawfare isn't just practiced against presidents, former presidents, and presidential candidates (or someone who has been all three.) Lawfare is also practiced against corporations and even small businesses that have fallen out of favor with the left - like oil companies.

Even states practice this kind of lawfare. States like New Jersey, which was party to a lawsuit against Exxon-Mobil, Chevron, Conoco-Phillips, and other oil companies, claiming that their products, their legal and irreplaceable products, are causing climate change. But this suit just slammed into a brick wall in the form of Judge Douglas H. Hurd, who has dismissed the case with prejudice. The Washington Free Beacon's Thomas Catenacci broke the news on X on Wednesday.

BREAKING: New Jersey's massive lawsuit accusing the oil industry of causing climate change was just dismissed with prejudice.

The case was pursued by the NJ AG, but funded by liberal NGOs. Similar cases in MD and Delaware have also been tossed.

A huge blow for eco activists. pic.twitter.com/Mv044iMLWp
— Thomas Catenacci (@ThomasCatenacci) February 5, 2025

Not all the winning right now is coming from the actions of the Trump administration. There is a sea change in the political climate right now; in legislatures and courtrooms, now and then, we're seeing a return to a little bit of good sense and reason. Judge Hurd did listen to the climate-scold arguments, as a judge does, but he clearly wasn't persuaded.

NJ Superior Court Judge Douglas Hurd didn't mince words in the ruling:

"Plaintiffs seek to regulate the nationwide—and even worldwide—marketing and distribution of lawful products on which billions of people outside of New Jersey rely to heat their homes, power their hospitals…
— Thomas Catenacci (@ThomasCatenacci) February 5, 2025

Judge Hurd's comments read in full:

"Plaintiffs seek to regulate the nationwide—and even worldwide—marketing and distribution of lawful products on which billions of people outside of New Jersey rely to heat their homes, power their hospitals and schools, produce and transport their food, and manufacture countless items essential to the safety, wellbeing, and advancement of modern society—in the process distorting the scope and content of state tort law beyond recognition."

"Dismissed with prejudice" means, in legal parlance, that a civil case is closed permanently, and plaintiffs cannot re-file the case at a later date. Judge Hurd not only dismissed the case, he slammed a big door closed behind it.

John Kerry: Africa Must Choose 'Right Kinds' of Electricity. Guess Who Should Pay for It?

Only last month, there was a similar win in Maryland.

A Maryland judge dismissed two landmark lawsuits that accused some of the world's largest oil and gas companies of causing climate change—a massive defeat for climate activists and Democrats who have increasingly turned to the judicial system to advance their agenda.
Judge Steven Platt of the Anne Arundel County District Court wrote in his decision tossing the cases brought by Anne Arundel County and the City of Annapolis on Thursday evening that counties and cities should not seek to use the courts to achieve climate policies such carbon emissions reductions.

These lawsuits, and indeed most of the activities and claims of climate scolds, aren't even within shouting distance of reality. They would have us cease all use of fossil fuels - coal, natural gas, and oil - in electrical generation and transportation, but those materials would still be irreplaceable for many industrial uses, ranging from clothing to personal electronics to pharmaceutical precursors. Suing the oil companies, claiming "climate change," is pretty much the definition of cutting off one's nose to spite one's face.

This lawsuit, and the Maryland lawsuit, are gone now. There will no doubt be others, but the precedent is set, and for once, it's a good one.