Latest news with #EnvironmentalGroups
Reuters
23-07-2025
- Reuters
Exxon plastic waste suit faces first major hurdle
July 23 (Reuters) - Plastic waste is ubiquitous – from empty water bottles to grocery bags, the detritus litters beaches, parks and roadways. The question for a federal judge in San Francisco now is whether Exxon Mobil can be held liable for such pollution, or if a novel suit claiming the company has created a public and private nuisance should be dismissed. A coalition of four environmental groups last year sued Exxon, opens new tab, a leading producer of polymers used to make single-use plastics, alleging the company wrongly led consumers in California to believe that plastic was easily and safely disposed of, when in reality, less than 5% of it is recycled in the United States. A spokesperson for Exxon, which has denied wrongdoing, did not respond to requests for comment, and the company's outside counsel from O'Melveny & Myers declined comment for this column. Exxon in court papers, opens new tab said the plaintiffs' theory that consumers purchased more plastic based on statements by Exxon was 'to put it mildly, a real stretch.' During an hour-long oral argument last week over Exxon's motion to dismiss, Chief U.S. District Judge Richard Seeborg pushed lawyers on both sides to lay out the parameters of nuisance law, while also hinting he might allow the claim to move forward – but more on that later. Nuisance, a centuries-old legal doctrine with its roots in English common law, applies when a defendant's conduct interferes with a public or private right to the enjoyment of life or property. Classic examples include blocking a public road or a factory that emits noxious odors. In recent years, nuisance claims have also been successfully invoked by state and local governments in litigation against opioid makers for their role in the epidemic of addiction and overdose deaths, netting close to $50 billion in payouts. Lead paint manufacturers also settled nuisance claims in California in 2019, agreeing to pay $305 million without admitting wrongdoing. Unlike personal injury claims, nuisance cases do not seek damages to compensate plaintiffs for an injury. Instead, they seek to make the party responsible for the nuisance pay to abate, or fix, the condition. The defense bar has called public nuisance a "super tort, opens new tab," complaining that such claims offer a way to sidestep the more rigorous requirements to prevail in a product liability lawsuit. Here, the Sierra Club, Surfrider Foundation, Heal the Bay, and San Francisco Baykeeper, which also allege violations of California's unfair competition law, want abatement, injunctive relief, compensatory damages and attorneys' fees, noting in a press release, opens new tab that California taxpayers shell out an estimated $420 million each year to clean up and prevent plastic pollution. Their case was brought in tandem with a similar action by California Attorney General Rob Bonta. The AG's higher-profile suit, opens new tab remains bogged down in a fight over venue after Seeborg remanded it to San Francisco Superior Court. Exxon has appealed that decision to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, where the dispute remains pending. In the meantime, the suit by the environmental groups has proceeded in federal court, where Seeborg must now decide if it can survive the motion to dismiss. 'What is the nuisance?' he asked plaintiffs lawyer Tyson Redenbarger, a partner at Cotchett, Pitre & McCarthy. 'Is it that these items are plastic (and) plastics cause pollution? Or is it that people acquire it thinking it's more recyclable than it is?' 'It's a very broad claim,' Seeborg added. 'My problem is, is it so broad that I can't really get my hands around?' Redenbarger countered that the nuisance standard itself is 'quite broad,' arguing that Exxon's 'years-long campaign to tell the public that plastic can be safely disposed of' led consumers to buy more of it, and that unrecycled plastic waste winds up in waterways or leaks chemicals into landfills. Redenbarger and spokespeople for the environmental coalition did not respond to requests for comment. Last year, New York Attorney General Letitia James came up short in a similar suit accusing PepsiCo of polluting the environment with single-use plastic packaging. In dismissing the case, a New York state court judge ruled it would run "contrary to every norm of established jurisprudence" to punish PepsiCo, because it was people, not the company, who ignored laws prohibiting littering. But Seeborg, who was appointed to the bench in 2009 by President Barack Obama, offered some indication he might not be so quick to toss the environmental groups' case – at least not at this stage of the litigation. When Exxon lawyer Dawn Sestito, a partner at O'Melveny, argued that unlike in the lead paint case — where companies allegedly touted the paint for interior use while knowing it was toxic — it's hard here "to imagine that talking about plastics as recyclable could be considered a promotion for hazardous use,' she said. Moreover, government entities also convey the message that plastic is recyclable, she said. Seeborg responded that the plaintiffs' "accusation is that you knew it wasn't, and you're in the business of polymer production,' he said. 'You may quite possibly prevail in terms of undermining the nuisance claim, but we're at the posture right now of just whether or not it can even go forward.' He added, 'This case isn't about whether going into the marketplace and saying 'Let's all recycle' is actionable. They're claiming something very different.' A few minutes later, when Sestito took aim at what she flagged as a basic disconnect in the plaintiffs' case – how is it, she said, that stating 'a product or plastics could be recyclable results in more plastic ending up in oceans or beaches or becoming pollution?' – Seeborg again shut her down. 'I don't want to beat the same drum over and over again, but is that something that would need to be explained at this stage of the litigation?' he said. 'It ultimately may need to be explained, but the question really is, have they articulated a legal theory that can advance, if they proved everything.'
CTV News
04-07-2025
- Business
- CTV News
Ontario pledges $10M for junior mining exploration
The province will invest up to $10 million in the Ontario Junior Exploration Program to boost mineral exploration, Mines Minister Stephen Lecce announced Thursday. He said the move supports "ethically sourced" resources and counters reliance on foreign suppliers. The announcement comes amid criticism of Bill 5, which fast-tracks projects, angering Indigenous and environmental groups.
National Post
26-06-2025
- Business
- National Post
Senate adopts Carney's fast-tracked major projects bill — well before Canada Day deadline
OTTAWA — The Senate adopted Prime Minister Mark Carney's internal trade and major projects bill without amendments on Thursday, making it the first government bill to pass through all stages during the spring sitting of Parliament and receive royal assent. Article content That means that Carney will make good on his election campaign promise to eliminate all federal barriers to interprovincial trade by Canada Day to have 'one Canadian economy.' Article content Article content The legislation has two parts. The Act to enact the Free Trade and Labour Mobility in Canada, which had support across party lines in the House of Commons, aims to eliminate internal trade and labour mobility barriers in Canada. Article content Article content The Building Canada Act, which would give cabinet sweeping powers to fast-track natural resource and infrastructure projects deemed in the national interest, has raised considerably more concerns from Indigenous peoples and environmental groups. Article content To speed up the legislative process, the Senate conducted a 'pre-study' of C-5 last week as the bill was being studied in a House of Commons committee. It was adopted at third reading in the House by a majority of MPs last Friday. Amendments were made to the bill by opposition parties in a bid for more transparency and to exempt federal laws such as the Indian Act from being circumvented to approve major projects. Still, some Indigenous groups claimed their treaty rights might not be respected. Article content Article content Mi'kmaq Senator Paul Prosper attempted to stall the rapid adoption of C-5 by moving an amendment that the bill include the principle of 'free, prior and informed consent' from First Nations, Inuit or Métis peoples before nation-building projects can move ahead. Article content 'I am confident that, by investing a few more months into this bill and ensuring that rights holders had an opportunity to share their thoughts and offer renditions, we would have seen this bill pass with overwhelming support. But I suppose now we will never know.' Article content Quebec Senator Pierre Dalphond argued that the government had to take 'bold action' quickly with C-5 to reinforce Canada's economy and create jobs, given the current trade war caused by U.S. President Donald Trump and the layoffs occurring as a result. Article content 'I trust the courts to stand firm and intervene if the government falls short of its obligations to our Indigenous peoples,' said Dalphond, a former court of appeal judge. Article content Prosper's amendment was defeated, as were all the other proposed amendments in the Senate. Having the upper chamber propose amendments to C-5 would have forced MPs to return to the House to vote on them before the bill could receive royal assent.
CTV News
26-06-2025
- Health
- CTV News
Brazeau recovering after collapsing in Senate Wednesday due to ‘dizzy spell'
Sen. Patrick Brazeau speaks to media as he returns to his Senate office in Ottawa on Thursday, July 14, 2016. (Sean Kilpatrick/The Canadian Press) Sen. Patrick Brazeau is recovering after a 'dizzy spell' made him 'briefly lose consciousness' during debate in the Senate on the government's major projects bill, a Senate spokesman said Thursday. The 50-year-old Independent senator rose to speak before falling sideways to the floor just after 4 p.m. Wednesday. Based on video of the incident, it was apparent that Brazeau knew something was wrong just before he fell. The Senate spokesman said Brazeau was taken to Ottawa's Civic Hospital and returned home later that evening. The spokesman said Brazeau is 'recovering and in good spirits.' Brazeau was alert when paramedics came to help him in the Senate chamber Tuesday afternoon, according to the spokesman. He added the senator is grateful to paramedics, Senate colleagues and hospital staff for their 'excellent' care. Speaker Raymonde Gagné suspended proceedings for roughly half an hour after Brazeau collapsed and many senators left the chamber until she reconvened the debate. Brazeau was about to speak on Bill C-5 when he fell. C-5 is a controversial bill meant to give Ottawa the power to fast-track 'national interest' project permits to boost the economy. The politically charged legislation has angered Indigenous and environmental groups who argue it does not adequately respect Charter rights and should not have been fast-tracked through Parliament. — With files from Dylan Robertson and Alessia Passafiume. This report by The Canadian Press was first published June 26, 2025. David Baxter, The Canadian Press
E&E News
13-06-2025
- Business
- E&E News
White House reviewing NEPA plans across agencies
The White House is reviewing proposed rules from a host of federal agencies that would dictate how the government implements the National Environmental Policy Act, the nation's magna carta of environmental laws. The Office of Management and Budget received proposed interim final rules from agencies including the departments of Energy, Interior and Defense, and one final rule from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission for NEPA 'implementing procedures,' according to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs dashboard. The reviews mark another step in the Trump administration's bid to overhaul how the federal government conducts environmental reviews at a quick pace, a move that's drawing criticism from environmental groups. Advertisement In February, the Trump White House scrapped decades' worth of rules at the Council on Environmental Quality that governed how agencies conduct reviews under NEPA for power plants, pipelines and other energy projects. In its place, the administration offered up voluntary guidance that legal experts noted was light on details.
