Forum
U.S. District Court for the Central District of California
Case Status
Pending
Docket Number
Additional Information
U.S. Chamber Sues California Over Climate Disclosure LawsCase Updates
District court denies Chamber and coalition’s motion for summary judgment, concluding that record is not sufficiently developed to award relief on First Amendment claim
November 05, 2024
U.S. Chamber and co-plaintiffs file motion for summary judgment asserting that California’s climate disclosure laws violate the First Amendment’s prohibition of compelled speech
May 24, 2024
U.S. Chamber and co-plaintiffs file opposition to California’s motion to partially dismiss their challenge to the state’s climate disclosure laws
May 01, 2024
Opposition to Motion to Dismiss
U.S. Chamber and co-plaintiffs file constitutional challenge to California’s climate disclosure legislation
January 30, 2024
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, along with the American Farm Bureau Federation, California Chamber of Commerce, Central Valley Business Federation, Los Angeles County Business Federation, and Western Growers Association, filed a lawsuit against the state of California in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California over its new corporate climate disclosure laws, which were signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom on Oct. 7, 2023.
The new corporate disclosure laws require businesses to report on emissions across their supply chain, including indirect emissions, no matter where they occur despite the fact that such emissions can be nearly impossible for a company to accurately calculate. The laws also require companies to subjectively report their worldwide climate-related financial risks and proposed mitigation strategies. The laws apply to companies across the U.S. and worldwide on the basis of even minimal operations in the state of California, thus attempting to impose essentially a national standard.
The suit was filed against the state of California for violating the First Amendment, which bars California from compelling a business to engage in subjective speech, and the federal Clean Air Act, which preempts a state’s ability to regulate emissions in other states — as California seeks to do by mandating reporting on out-of-state emissions.
Eugene Scalia, Katherine Moran Meeks, Brian A. Richman, Bradley J. Hamburger, Samuel Eckman, and Elizabeth Strassner of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP served as outside counsel.
Case Documents
- Complaint -- Chamber v. California Air Resources Board (C.D. Cal.)
- Amended Complaint -- Chamber v. Randolph (C.D. Cal.)
- Memo of Points and Authorities ISO Defs Motion to Dismiss -- Chamber v. Randolph (C.D. Cal.)
- Opposition to Motion to Dismiss -- Chamber v. Randolph (C.D. Cal.)
- Chamber Memo ISO MSJ Claim -- Chamber v. Randolph (C.D. Cal.)
- Chamber MSJ Reply -- Chamber v. Randolph (C.D. Cal.)
- Order -- Chamber v. Randolph (C.D. Cal.)