WASHINGTON — The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday heard opening arguments in Chevron v. Plaquemines, a court case stemming from allegations that oil and gas companies, including Chevron, caused damage to Louisiana's coast.

In April 2025, Chevron was ordered to pay $740 million to repair Louisiana's coastline after a Louisiana jury found it had violated state environmental regulations for decades. Chevron appealed that decision and seeks to have the case heard in federal court.

SCOTUS, though, is not concerned with whether or not those oil and gas companies are actually responsible. Instead, they will rule on whether cases like this, filed by an individual parish, should be heard in state or federal court.

Several oil and gas groups and environmental organizations issued statements after Supreme Court Justices heard opening arguments on Monday.

Louisiana Association of Business and Industry (LABI):
“For years, LABI has been clear: these lawsuits don’t fix coastal land loss. Instead, they create uncertainty for employers, investors and job creators at a time when Louisiana should be focused on growth, competitiveness and long-term stability. How and where these cases are handled matters—not just for the energy industry, but for the signal it sends to businesses nationwide considering investing here.

“Louisiana’s coast is critical to our entire nation, and protecting it requires collaboration, innovation and sustainable funding solutions—not lawsuits built on redefining legal standards decades after lawful conduct took place.

“LABI remains closely engaged on this issue and will continue advocating for a fair, predictable legal system that supports investment, job creation and a stronger future for Louisiana’s communities and economy.”

Grow Louisiana Coalition:
“Two facts remain clear: Chevron’s predecessors played an integral role in supporting our nation’s wartime mission through federal and state permitted activities more than eight decades ago, and it’s time for these coastal lawsuits to end. Lawsuit supporters claiming at the 11th hour that this never-ending exercise is to benefit our state’s coast is a disingenuous attempt to fool the people of Louisiana. This is about billboard lawyers getting their piece of the action first and foremost. That has never changed, and the damage has been staggering.

Since 2009, Louisiana has lost more than $600 billion in economic output. Energy production in Louisiana waters plunged 56% while production in federal waters grew 15%. State mineral royalties have been slashed in half, and since 2014, Louisiana energy workers have missed out on $1.1 billion in pay.

The impact is undeniable. Louisiana families, communities and small businesses are paying the price while a handful of billboard lawyers profit. It’s time to end coastal lawsuit abuse and focus on real solutions that protect our coast, strengthen our economy and sustain the industries that fuel our state. Louisiana works when we work together.”

Louisiana Mid-Continent Oil & Gas Association (LMOGA) President Tommy Faucheux:
“I think it is encouraging that the U.S. Supreme Court recognized the importance of reviewing this case. The high court has the opportunity here to apply the law fairly and consistently to help preserve legal stability for the energy industry that has fueled America’s economy and continues to breathe life into Louisiana communities. We really can't prosper here in Louisiana in this current litigious climate. You have misguided lawsuits that opportunistically target the industry that is our main economic driver. From today’s arguments, I think it is clear that this case should never have been considered at the state level. It should be referred to the federal courts.”

Pelican Institute for Public Policy CEO Daniel Erspamer:
“Today’s arguments make it clear that these cases belong in federal court. As the Assistant U.S. Solicitor General noted on behalf of the federal government, the novel reasoning that was applied in the Fifth Circuit’s ruling to keep the cases in state court is deeply unworkable and problematic. Now the Supreme Court has an opportunity to right that wrong, uphold the rule of law, provide much-needed clarity for courts across the country regarding the proper application of the federal officer removal statute, and ensure that cases such as this are heard in neutral federal courts.”