Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall is warning that the Boulder climate lawsuit now before the U.S. Supreme Court could ultimately raise costs for Alabama consumers far beyond the price they pay at the gas pump.
Marshall discussed the case Monday on Fox News as the Supreme Court heard arguments in Suncor Energy v. County Commissioners of Boulder County, a closely watched dispute over whether state and local governments can use state law to seek damages from energy companies for alleged climate-related harms.
.@AGSteveMarshall warns that a Boulder win would hit far more than the energy industry. Consumers would feel it across the economy.
“If they’re able to succeed with this case, there’s no telling not only how much we’ll have to pay to be able to put gas in our tanks, but the cost… pic.twitter.com/oG0iHYK6lM
— Alliance For Consumers (@for_consumers) October 5, 2026
Boulder County and the City of Boulder sued ExxonMobil and Suncor in 2018, alleging the companies contributed to climate change while misleading the public about the risks associated with fossil fuels. The energy companies argue that claims involving interstate and global greenhouse gas emissions are governed by federal law and cannot be imposed through individual state laws.
Marshall’s office has taken the companies’ side in the dispute, leading a 26-state amicus brief arguing that allowing Boulder’s case to proceed would give individual states and localities too much influence over national energy policy.
RELATED: Steve Marshall helps sink New York’s $75 billion climate ‘penalty’ on coal, oil and gas producers
On Fox, Marshall argued that the implications could extend well beyond oil producers.
“They’re ultimately going to come after the cattlemen in Alabama, those that are developing concrete to be able to grow our economy,” Marshall said. “There is no end of the theory that’s being offered here.”
Marshall’s brief makes a similar federalism argument, warning that a system in which each state could impose liability for emissions entering the global atmosphere could interfere with other states’ ability to set their own energy policies.
Marshall said the most immediate effect for consumers could come through higher energy prices.
“It’s interesting that all those that are complaining about this administration right now in gas prices, if they’re able to succeed with this case, there’s no telling not only how much we have to pay to be able to put gas in our tanks, but the cost of goods and services that are going to be impacted by higher energy prices,” Marshall said.
Some Supreme Court justices also raised questions Monday about how broadly similar lawsuits could spread. Chief Justice John Roberts asked whether municipalities across the country would begin filing cases if Boulder prevailed, while Justice Brett Kavanaugh noted that the theory could potentially reach manufacturers and other businesses.
Boulder maintains that it is not attempting to regulate nationwide emissions. Its attorneys argue the case is instead about holding companies financially responsible under Colorado law for allegedly misleading the public and contributing to climate-related costs borne by local governments.
Following oral arguments, Marshall said the dispute ultimately comes down to who has authority to make national energy policy.
“Our energy independence depends on rules made by Congress and the states, not by a single county commission,” Marshall said.
A Supreme Court decision is expected in the coming months.
Sawyer Knowles is a state and political reporter for Yellowhammer News. You may contact him at [email protected].
