The surge in climate-related lawsuits against Big Oil, like the one discussed in The Guardian and the legal battle initiated by Chicago, is presented as a fight for environmental justice. However, a more thorough examination reveals that these lawsuits are less about climate change and more about redistributing wealth, weakening the fossil fuel industry, and enriching advocacy groups that fund these lawsuits. Companies like ExxonMobil, Chevron, and Shell have been accused of deceiving the public about fossil fuels' role in climate change. But in reality, these lawsuits are part of a broader lawfare strategy designed to drain the resources of oil companies and redirect money to well-funded advocacy groups backed by wealthy donors.

Both lawsuits accuse major oil companies of fueling climate disasters by withholding information about the environmental risks posed by fossil fuel consumption. The New York case, as detailed in The Guardian, claims that these companies are responsible for damages related to heatwaves, flooding, and extreme weather events. Similarly, Chicago’s lawsuit filed earlier in 2024, points to climate-related events like flooding, extreme heat, and shoreline erosion, claiming that these disasters were exacerbated by the fossil fuel industry’s failure to act and alleged deception.

Both cases draw from the same climate change narrative, that oil companies are responsible for extreme weather events due to their greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. These lawsuits aim to hold oil companies financially accountable for the rising costs of climate-related damage, framing their legal claims as a way to shift the burden of costs from local governments to corporations. However, as in Chicago’s case, the outcomes of these lawsuits remain unclear, as they have faced procedural delays and have yet to produce tangible settlements or verdicts.