Law360 has identified one of Mountain States Legal Foundation’s major amicus efforts as one of the top four Colorado cases to watch in 2026. The case, Suncor Energy (USA) Inc. v. County Commissioners of Boulder County, could reach the U.S. Supreme Court next year and carries sweeping national implications.
MSLF filed two amicus briefs in the case on behalf of Professors Richard Epstein and John Yoo, urging the courts to reaffirm a fundamental principle: national issues must be decided by the nation, not by a handful of local officials in a state courtroom.
What the Case Is About
In 2018, Boulder County officials sued Suncor and Exxon, claiming that the companies misled the public about energy production, and should be held liable for climate-related harms in Boulder. But their lawsuit goes far beyond seeking compensation for local damages. Instead, Boulder is attempting to use state tort law to influence and effectively set nationwide climate policy.
Law360 notes that the case is now positioned to become a major vehicle for answering a crucial question: Can local governments use state tort claims to regulate global climate change?
Suncor and Exxon have asked the U.S. Supreme Court to review the Colorado Supreme Court’s 5–2 decision allowing Boulder’s lawsuit to proceed. Legal experts told Law360 that there is a “good chance” the Supreme Court will take the case, because similar climate lawsuits are proliferating across the country.
Why MSLF Got Involved
MSLF’s amicus briefs highlight the danger of letting local officials use state law to dictate nationwide policy. Climate-related policies have always been addressed at the federal level—through Congress, federal agencies, and national democratic processes.
If Boulder’s lawsuit is allowed to stand, the consequences would be enormous:
- Local courts could reshape national energy and environmental policy.
- Producers, consumers, and businesses across the country could face limitless litigation.
- Thousands of counties could file copycat lawsuits against thousands of defendants.
- Longstanding legal rules about federal preemption and tort law could be upended.
In short, Boulder’s theory is not just novel—it is dangerous. As we argue in our brief, if the nation wants to address climate policy, the nation must decide that question, not a few officials in Boulder seeking to impose nationwide change through litigation.
What’s at Stake
This case reaches far beyond Colorado. It goes to the heart of our Constitutional structure, and how the United States addresses national and global challenges.
If the Supreme Court agrees to hear the case, the justices could finally clarify the limits of state tort law in climate litigation, and confirm that national issues demand national solutions.
MSLF will continue standing up for the rule of law, separation of powers, and the Constitutional framework designed to protect all Americans.
