By Alethia Kasben
Gongwer News Service
A lawsuit from the Michigan Department of Attorney General alleging some of the country’s major gas and oil companies conspired to restrain trade with renewable energy to maintain dominance over energy markets was dismissed Tuesday by a federal judge.
The case, Michigan v. B.P. et. al., which Attorney General Dana Nessel filed in January, was dismissed by Judge Jane Beckering of the U.S. District Court of the Western District of Michigan.
A spokesperson for Nessel said Wednesday she disagrees with the ruling and is exploring additional options.
In May 2024, the Department of Attorney General began pursuing litigation related to climate change impacts, but Nessel said earlier this year that during the investigation her office uncovered that the companies were running “one of the most successful antitrust conspiracies in United States history.”
The lawsuit argued the companies used coordinated efforts to eliminate consumer choice, which worsened energy affordability. It also argued the companies abandoned renewable energy products, suppressed information on hidden costs of fossil fuels, intimidated public officials who could be watchdogs and used trade associations to divert money from renewable energy.
Beckering, in an order dated Tuesday, wrote the state lacks antitrust standing to pursue any remedy under law.
“Michigan has alleged just one antitrust injury – overcharges for transportation and primary energy – and Illinois Brick bars Michigan from recovering damages as indirect purchasers under federal law,” Beckering wrote, citing a different case. “Nor can Michigan recover damages for the direct purchases it and its residents made from defendants or enjoin them from continuing any alleged conspiracy because Michigan fails to plausibly plead that this conspiracy proximately caused and continues to cause overcharges.”
The Department of Justice, which attempted to sue Nessel before she filed the suit, celebrated the dismissal in a statement.
“This dismissal should make states rethink the use of lawfare to enact climate change policy,” Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward Jr. said in a statement. “We are committed to upholding antitrust and environmental law. Michigan’s case would have accomplished neither. That is what we highlighted in our statement of interest.”
Gongwer News Service
A lawsuit from the Michigan Department of Attorney General alleging some of the country’s major gas and oil companies conspired to restrain trade with renewable energy to maintain dominance over energy markets was dismissed Tuesday by a federal judge.
The case, Michigan v. B.P. et. al., which Attorney General Dana Nessel filed in January, was dismissed by Judge Jane Beckering of the U.S. District Court of the Western District of Michigan.
A spokesperson for Nessel said Wednesday she disagrees with the ruling and is exploring additional options.
In May 2024, the Department of Attorney General began pursuing litigation related to climate change impacts, but Nessel said earlier this year that during the investigation her office uncovered that the companies were running “one of the most successful antitrust conspiracies in United States history.”
The lawsuit argued the companies used coordinated efforts to eliminate consumer choice, which worsened energy affordability. It also argued the companies abandoned renewable energy products, suppressed information on hidden costs of fossil fuels, intimidated public officials who could be watchdogs and used trade associations to divert money from renewable energy.
Beckering, in an order dated Tuesday, wrote the state lacks antitrust standing to pursue any remedy under law.
“Michigan has alleged just one antitrust injury – overcharges for transportation and primary energy – and Illinois Brick bars Michigan from recovering damages as indirect purchasers under federal law,” Beckering wrote, citing a different case. “Nor can Michigan recover damages for the direct purchases it and its residents made from defendants or enjoin them from continuing any alleged conspiracy because Michigan fails to plausibly plead that this conspiracy proximately caused and continues to cause overcharges.”
The Department of Justice, which attempted to sue Nessel before she filed the suit, celebrated the dismissal in a statement.
“This dismissal should make states rethink the use of lawfare to enact climate change policy,” Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward Jr. said in a statement. “We are committed to upholding antitrust and environmental law. Michigan’s case would have accomplished neither. That is what we highlighted in our statement of interest.”
––––––––––––––––––––
Subscribe to the Legal News!
https://www.legalnews.com/Home/Subscription
Full access to public notices, articles, columns, archives, statistics, calendar and more
Day Pass Only $4.95!
One-County $80/year
Three-County & Full Pass also available
