Supreme Court to hear case on Louisiana's eroding coast

The Supreme Court will consider whether lawsuits by Louisiana parishes over coastal erosion belong in federal or state court; the article says oil companies invoke wartime contracts and the federal officer removal statute, and eight justices will hear the matter.

The Supreme Court will take up a dispute over whether lawsuits filed by Louisiana parishes about coastal land loss belong in federal court or state court. The parishes say decades of drilling, dredging and waste disposal without proper permits accelerated erosion and cite a 1978 Louisiana coastal law in their claims. The article says oil companies led by Chevron and Exxon Mobil argue the cases should be moved to federal court under the federal officer removal statute, pointing to wartime contracts to supply fuel. Only eight justices will consider the case after Justice Samuel Alito recused himself. Key facts: - The core legal issue is whether the federal officer removal statute allows these coastal lawsuits to be heard in federal court rather than state court. - The parishes allege long-term activities by oil companies contributed to coastal erosion and seek damages that could fund restoration; a jury in April awarded Plaquemines Parish $745 million in one case, the article reports. - The oil companies argue the work was tied to wartime federal contracts and therefore fits the removal statute; a federal trial judge and a divided 5th Circuit panel reached differing conclusions about that link. - The Trump administration has joined the case in support of the oil companies, and one justice has recused, leaving eight justices to weigh the matter. Summary: The Court will decide whether these disputes must be heard in federal court under the federal officer removal statute, a narrow jurisdictional question that could influence other state suits involving energy companies. Timing of a final decision is undetermined at this time.