Supreme Court’s New Term Opens With Boulder Climate Case: What’s at Stake and What Comes Next

US News — Monday, October 5, 2026

The Supreme Court’s new term opens today, and the justices begin with a case that could decide the fate of dozens of climate-change lawsuits filed by states and cities across the country. In Suncor Energy (U.S.A.) Inc. v. County Commissioners of Boulder County, the Court will consider whether federal law blocks state-law claims seeking damages from oil companies for the local effects of global climate change. Only eight justices will hear it: Justice Samuel Alito stepped aside last week.

Here is what happened, who is affected, what each side argues and what comes next as the October 2026 term gets under way.

The Supreme Court’s New Term at a Glance

By tradition, the Court opens its term on the first Monday in October. The October 2026 argument calendar lists these cases for the first two weeks:

The Boulder Climate Case: Key Facts

• Filed: April 17, 2018, by Boulder County and the City of Boulder, Colorado, against Suncor Energy and ExxonMobil (Legal Planet).
• Claims: Public and private nuisance, trespass, unjust enrichment, civil conspiracy and violation of the Colorado Consumer Protection Act.
• Relief sought: Money damages for past and future costs of responding to climate impacts — not an order to stop producing fuel.
• Lower court: The Colorado Supreme Court ruled 5–2 on May 12, 2025, that the case could proceed (opinion).
• Supreme Court review: Granted February 23, 2026; the Court also added a jurisdictional question of its own (National Constitution Center).
• Question presented: “Whether federal law precludes state law claims seeking relief for injuries allegedly caused by the effects of interstate and international greenhouse-gas emissions on the global climate.”

Why Justice Alito’s recusal matters

Justice Alito notified the Court on September 28 that he would not participate, the Associated Press reported. His letter did not give a reason; the AP noted he does not own Suncor or ExxonMobil stock but holds shares in ConocoPhillips and Phillips 66. With eight justices, a 4–4 tie would leave the Colorado Supreme Court’s ruling in place without setting a national precedent.

What Each Side Argues

The energy companies and the federal government

Suncor and ExxonMobil argue that federal law — including the Clean Air Act and the constitutional structure governing interstate matters — leaves no room for one state’s tort law to address global emissions. Their briefs describe the suit as an “audacious attempt to use state tort law” to remedy worldwide climate effects (as summarized by Legal Planet). The Trump administration supports the companies. Solicitor General Sarah Harris framed the issue this way: “Can one city wield one State’s law to dictate how the rest of the world must address a global problem?” (National Constitution Center).

Boulder and its supporters

Boulder argues the Clean Air Act regulates emissions from sources, not how companies market their products, and that state courts have long handled in-state injuries caused by out-of-state conduct. The county says the companies knew about climate risks while concealing them, and that local taxpayers should not bear the full cost of adaptation. Amicus briefs supporting Boulder include filings from Colorado ranchers, a bipartisan group of former EPA administrators and the Natural Resources Defense Council (Legal Planet).

Outside commentary

Oramel H. Skinner of the Alliance for Consumers, which is critical of the lawsuits, told the Deseret News that “blue jurisdictions” are increasingly using courts to export their policy positions beyond their borders. Consumer Watchdog’s Alexandra Nagy, who pressed for Alito’s recusal, called his decision the right one, according to the AP.

Who Is Affected

• States and localities: Roughly 60 states and local governments have filed similar climate lawsuits, according to the National Constitution Center; none has reached trial.
• Energy companies: The AP reports the cases collectively involve potential damages in the billions of dollars. Related coverage: Vanderbiltreport.com Energy.
• Residents and taxpayers: The outcome affects who pays for local climate adaptation — such as wildfire, flood and heat-related costs — in communities that have sued.

Possible Outcomes

Legal analysts at Legal Planet outline several paths. These are possibilities, not predictions:

1. The Court dismisses on jurisdictional grounds, leaving the case to continue in Colorado state court.
2. A broad ruling that federal law bars these claims, which could end most similar suits nationwide.
3. A narrower ruling that bars emissions-based claims but lets deception-based claims proceed.
4. A ruling for Boulder, sending the case back to Colorado for discovery and possible trial.
5. A 4–4 tie, which would affirm the Colorado ruling without a national precedent.

Other Major Cases This Term

Beyond October, the Court has agreed to hear several closely watched cases, according to the Deseret News and the National Constitution Center:

• Elections: Republican National Committee v. Mi Familia Vota (argument Dec. 8) — proof-of-citizenship requirements for voter registration and list maintenance before federal elections.
• Second Amendment: Viramontes v. Cook County and Grant v. Higgins — restrictions on AR-15-style rifles.
• Religion: St. Mary Catholic Parish v. Roy (Colorado’s universal preschool program) and Grand v. City of University Heights (prayer gatherings in private homes).
• Immigration: Department of Homeland Security v. D.V.D. (deportations to third countries) and Barbosa da Cunha v. Rhoney (detention of noncitizens).
• Criminal justice: Kian v. Florida (six-person juries) and Guerrero v. Johnson (capital case; argument Nov. 4).

SCOTUSblog executive editor Zach Shemtob told the Deseret News that while the term has “some very significant cases so far,” it does not yet have “the same firepower as last term,” when the Court decided major cases on tariffs and birthright citizenship. Emergency applications could change that as the term progresses.

What Happens Next

• Today: Oral arguments in Suncor and Johnson. The Court posts argument transcripts and audio on supremecourt.gov.
• This week: Arguments continue Tuesday and Wednesday.
• Decision timing: Rulings in argued cases are typically issued by the end of June 2027.

For more national coverage, see The Week Ahead (Oct. 5–11, 2026) and Protect College Sports Act Heads to Final Senate Vote.

Labeling note: Case facts, dates and procedural history are verified from court records and the linked reporting. Party positions and quotes are the parties’ and commentators’ own statements. The “Possible Outcomes” section reflects outside legal analysis and is not a prediction by Vanderbiltreport.com. Arguments are developing today.

Sources

• Supreme Court of the United States — October Term 2026 argument calendar
• Associated Press — Alito steps aside in a major climate case
• National Constitution Center — Climate change lawsuit to kick off Supreme Court’s next term
• Legal Planet — Guide to Suncor Energy v. Boulder County
• Colorado Supreme Court opinion (2025), via Justia
• Deseret News — The Supreme Court’s term starts Monday

Publisher Disclaimer: Vanderbiltreport.com publishes news and information for general informational and educational purposes. Information is compiled from sources believed to be reliable, but Vanderbiltreport.com does not guarantee the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of all information presented. Readers should independently verify information and conduct their own research before making financial, investment, business, or other decisions.