Climate Lawsuits Are a Backdoor Tax on Energy and Consumers

Across the country, climate activists are swapping protest signs for legal briefs, and it's costing all of us. As the Supreme Court considers whether to take up the Boulder, Colorado, climate lawsuit, a key attorney behind the case just said the quiet part out loud: these lawsuits are a backdoor carbon tax.

David Bookbinder, a longtime legal strategist for climate litigation, admitted during a recent panel that lawsuits like Boulder’s are designed to force higher prices on oil and gas, not just for companies but for consumers. In his own words, "Tort liability is an indirect carbon tax... [and] the people who buy those products are now going to be paying.”

This is not about climate change. It is about punishing domestic energy and shifting power to those who benefit from higher costs, imported oil, and restricted mobility. If climate were the true concern, why would California import more oil from countries with weak environmental standards while destroying parts of the Amazon to satisfy its fuel needs? Why fight local production when U.S. operations are among the cleanest and most regulated in the world?

The truth is these lawsuits are a tool. They are a calculated effort to impose new taxes without calling them taxes, to reshape the economy through courtroom rulings instead of legislation, and to raise prices so that people don’t want to drive.

These activists' work is not just about energy companies. It is about making every American family pay more at the pump and for everyday goods.

The Supreme Court now has a chance to step in and decide whether energy policy should be dictated by local courts and activist lawyers or by Congress and the American people.