Federal Judge Blocks New York’s $75 Billion Climate Superfund Law

On a recent Monday, Chief Judge Brenda Sannes of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York issued a 63-page opinion holding that New York’s Climate Change Superfund Act cannot be enforced. The decision, based on preemption by the federal Clean Air Act, halts a scheme that would have required fossil-fuel companies to pay $3 billion annually for 25 years—totaling $75 billion—to fund climate-adaptation projects such as coastal wetlands, storm-water systems, roads, bridges, and electric-grid upgrades.

Mother Jones

Governor Kathy Hochul signed the Climate Change Superfund Act into law in December 2024. The legislation sought to hold roughly three dozen major fossil-fuel producers financially responsible for cumulative greenhouse-gas emissions between 2000 and 2018. The act faced immediate legal challenges, culminating in a February 2025 lawsuit led by West Virginia Attorney General John McCuskey and joined by 22 Republican state attorneys general, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the American Petroleum Institute, and the National Mining Association.

The Epoch TimesNY's plan to charge fossil-fuel producers $75B for climate change damages struck down Mother Jones

• Total liability: $75 billion over 25 years

The Epoch Times

• Annual charge: $3 billion per year

The Epoch Times

• Targeted period for emissions: 2000-2018

The Epoch Times

• Number of companies covered: about three dozen major fossil-fuel producers

The Epoch Times

The Department of Justice, through Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Adam Gustafson, welcomed the ruling, saying it aligns with the administration’s directive to protect American energy from state overreach. New York’s Attorney General Letitia James has not yet filed an appeal, while Governor Hochul’s office indicated it is reviewing the decision.

NY's plan to charge fossil-fuel producers $75B for climate change damages struck down

Legal scholars questioned the court’s reliance on a 2021 Second Circuit decision. Patrick Parenteau, a law professor at Vermont Law School, argued that the precedent is “not binding.” Environmental advocates warned that “the floods will still come, roads will still wash out, and communities will still need billions to protect themselves.”

Mother Jones

Sources differ on the precise number of companies targeted, with some describing “about three dozen” and others referring more generally to “major fossil-fuel companies.” The outcome of the parallel Vermont superfund lawsuit remains pending, leaving uncertainty about how other states may proceed.

Mother Jones

• “The Climate Act is an unusual and sweeping statute, designed to address the effects of climate change–a ‘uniquely international problem of national concern’,” — Brenda Sannes, chief judge

Mother Jones

• “The Department of Justice is delivering on President Trump’s order to protect American energy from state overreach,” — Adam Gustafson, deputy assistant attorney

Mother Jones

New York’s Attorney General Letitia James is expected to decide whether to appeal Judge Sannes’s decision. The pending Vermont case may provide further guidance on the viability of state-level climate superfund laws. State legislators in New York and other “blue” states are monitoring the ruling as they consider future climate-damage financing proposals.

Mother Jones