Rhode Island v. Chevron Corp. - 393 F. Supp. 3d 142 (D.R.I. 2019)

Rule:

A suit commenced in a state court must remain there until cause is shown for its transfer under some act of Congress.

Facts:

The State of Rhode Island brought this suit against energy companies it says are partly responsible for the once and future climate crisis. The State alleged that Defendants have together  extracted, advertised, and sold a substantial percentage of the fossil fuels burned globally since the 1960s. This activity has released an immense amount of greenhouse gas into the Earth's atmosphere, changing its climate and leading to all kinds of displacement, death (extinctions, even), and destruction. What is more, Defendants understood the consequences of their activity decades ago, when transitioning from fossil fuels to renewable sources of energy would have saved a world of trouble. But instead of sounding the alarm, Defendants went out of their way to becloud the emerging scientific consensus and further delay changes — however existentially necessary — that would in any way interfere with their multi-billion-dollar profits. Defendants moved to remove the case from the District Court for the District of Rhode Island’s jurisdiction. The State moved to remand the case back to said district court.

Issue:

Does the District Court have jurisdiction over the case?

Answer:

Yes.

Conclusion:

The State's are thoroughly state-law claims. The rights, duties, and rules of decision implicated by the complaint are all supplied by state law, without reference to anything federal. By mentioning foreign affairs, federal regulations, and the navigable waters of the United States, Defendants seek to raise issues that they may press in the course of this litigation, but that are not perforce presented by the State's claims. These are, if anything, premature defenses, which even if ultimately decisive, cannot support removal. Nor, for that matter, can the novelty of this suite of issues as applied to claims like the State's.