Climate Superfund Laws Defense Cases

Climate disasters have caused billions of dollars in damage annually in the United States alone. As the climate crisis continues to wreak havoc on communities around the country, adapting to climate change and recovering from these disasters will continue to cost billions of dollars every year. 

To date, taxpayers have been responsible for paying the vast majority of these costs. But several states are stepping up to change this unfair system. "Climate superfund," or polluters pay legislation, requires large fossil fuel producers to share the cost of climate adaptation efforts. The philosophy behind these laws is simple: The fossil fuel companies that share responsibility for creating pollution should also share the responsibility for cleaning it up. Vermont and New York were the first states to enact climate superfund laws in 2024.  

Though neither law would require payments to begin for several years, opponents have already sued to try to stop these laws from taking effect. Industry groups led by the American Petroleum Institute and U.S. Chamber of Commerce, a coalition of state governments led by West Virginia, and the Trump administration each filed lawsuits challenging both states’ statutes.  

NRDC has teamed up with several partners to help Vermont and New York defend their laws—and their right to protect the health and safety of their citizens—from these attacks. In Vermont, NRDC attorneys represent the Northeast Organic Farming Association of Vermont and Conservation Law Foundation, highlighting the perspectives of Vermonters whose homes and businesses have been devastated by repeated catastrophic flooding events. And in New York, NRDC attorneys partnered with Earthjustice to represent WE ACT for Environmental Justice, Citizens Campaign for the Environment, Catskill Mountainkeeper, and Black Farmers United–New York State, illuminating the climate harms suffered by New Yorkers, from Buffalo to Montauk.  

The U.S. District Court for the District of Vermont granted our clients permission to intervene in summer 2025. Briefing has now concluded in Vermont, and the court heard oral argument in March 2026.

The U.S. District Courts for the Southern and Northern Districts of New York denied our clients’ motions to intervene in those cases. As a result, we filed amicus curiae (or "friend of the court") briefs in those cases. Both cases are pending.