Supreme Court urges blocking California law requiring companies to disclose climate impacts
Washington—— The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and other business groups on Friday urged the Supreme Court to block a new California law that would require thousands of companies to disclose their emissions and their impact on climate change.
One of the laws is due to take effect on January 1, and an emergency appeal asked the court to temporarily put it on hold.
Their lawyers argue the measures violate the First Amendment because the state would force companies to speak out on their preferred topics.
“In less than eight weeks, California will force thousands of companies across the country to speak out on the controversial topic of climate change,” they said in an appeal on behalf of the California Chamber of Commerce and the Los Angeles County Business Federation.
They said the two new laws would require companies to disclose the “climate-related risks” they foresee and the impact of their operations and emissions on climate change.
“Both laws are part of California’s public campaign to force companies to engage in public debate about climate issues and force them to change their behavior,” they said. According to the sponsors, their goal is “to ensure the public truly knows who is green and who is not.”
SB 261 would require thousands of companies doing business in California to assess their “climate-related financial risks” and how to reduce that risk. The second measure, Senate Bill 253, applies to larger companies, requiring them to assess and disclose their emissions and how their operations impact the climate.
The appeal argued that these laws amounted to unconstitutional forced speech.
“No state may violate the First Amendment right to set climate policy for the nation. Forced speech laws are held to be unconstitutional — especially in a place like here where they dictate a value-laden playbook on a controversial topic like climate change,” they argued.
The emergency appeal was made by Washington state attorney Eugene Scalia, son of the late Justice Antonin Scalia.
The companies tried unsuccessfully to persuade a California judge to block the measures. ExxonMobil filed the lawsuit in Sacramento and the Chamber of Commerce filed suit in Los Angeles.
In August, U.S. District Judge Otis Wright II in Los Angeles refused to block the laws on the grounds that they “regulate commercial speech,” which is less protected under the First Amendment. Companies are generally required to disclose financial data and factual information about their operations, he said.
Business lawyers said they have appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit seeking an injunction, but no action has been taken.
Shortly after the chamber appealed, state attorneys in Iowa and 24 other Republican-leaning states joined in support. They said they “strongly oppose the radical green speech mandate that California is trying to impose on businesses.”
The justices are likely to ask California state prosecutors to respond next week before taking action on the appeal.
