Input Stories

The NAM, energy manufacturers including Chevron and federal contractors engaged in nationally important work all scored a win late last week, when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Chevron could move an environmental case against it to federal court (SCOTUSblog).

What’s going on: “By a vote of 8-0 in Chevron USA Inc. v. Plaquemines Parish, Louisiana … the justices on Friday morning threw out [an] appeals court’s decision” that would have forced Chevron to defend against claims for alleged damage to Louisiana’s coastal environment in plaintiff-favored Louisiana state court.

• The high court decision follows years of litigation over the correct forum for the suit, including five amicus briefs filed by the NAM over a five-year period urging the ruling on the grounds that Chevron had been “operating as [a] federal contractor at the time of the actions at issue,”—specifically drilling crude oil which was then refined into aviation gas to support the allies during WWII—and thus, federal officer removal jurisdiction should apply.
• The statute allows an officer or “person acting under that officer” to remove to federal court state suits “for or relating to any act under color of such office,” according to the U.S. Code.
• As the NAM explained, “[w]eakening federal-officer removal would weaken the federal government’s ability to attract and retain contractors, especially on projects that are important but controversial.”

Why it’s important: “[T]he court sent a clear and unmistakable message that these cases belong in federal court,” NAM state partner the Louisiana Association of Business and Industry said in a statement following news of the Supreme Court decision.

• “The court correctly recognized that complex questions involving federal law, interstate commerce and national energy policy must be addressed within the proper federal jurisdiction.”