整理人：安双庆
Seeking (Some) Climate Justice in State Tort Law在州侵权法中寻求(一些)气候正义
Abstract: Over the last decade, an increasing number of path-breaking cases have been filed throughout the world, seeking to hold fossil fuel industry companies and governments accountable for their actions and inactions that have contributed to the climate crisis. This Article focuses on an important subset of those casesÏnamely, the recent surge of cases brought by states, cities, and counties all over the United States alleging that the largest fossil fuel industry actors, including ExxonMobil, Shell, BP, and Chevron, are liable in state tort law for harms caused by climate change.The Article begins with a synthesis of the history of U.S. climate tort litigation, grouping the cases into two Ðwaves.Ñ The current state tort cases are in the second wave and represent an attempt to avoid the legal pitfalls that plagued the first. The Article then undertakes the first close examination of the defendantsÓ response to the second-wave climate tort cases; namely, that the federal common law of nuisance preempts all the plaintiffsÓ state tort claims. Unsurprisingly, the issue has divided the courts that have decided it, as the Supreme Court case law is sparse and unclear. The Article identifies the doctrinal problem in the case law, and then argues that the only way to bring coherence to the law while adhering to federalism principles is to disallow preemption of state tort law by federal common law in these cases. Finally, the Article offers a new perspective on why that is also the right result as a policy matter.The second-wave climate tort suits are part of a larger global movement of resorting to the courts to demand climate justice after decades of inaction by policymakers. The current era of climate disruption and its catastrophic threats demand not only new and improved legal and policy mechanisms, but also the use of current onesÏincluding state tort lawÏto the fullest extent possible.
【摘译】在过去的十年里，世界各地出现了越来越多具有开创性的案件，试图让化石燃料行业公司和政府对他们造成气候危机的作为和不作为负责。本文将重点关注其中的一个重要子集，即最近由美国各州、市和县提起的案件激增，这些案件声称，包括埃克森美孚、壳牌、英国石油BP和雪佛龙在内的最大化石燃料行业参与者，在州侵权法中对气候变化造成的损害负有责任。文章首先综合了美国气候侵权诉讼的历史，将案件分为两波。目前的州侵权案件处于第二波，代表了一种试图避免法律陷阱的尝试。然后，本文首次仔细研究了被告对第二波气候侵权案件的回应，即联邦普通妨害法优先于所有原告的州侵权索赔。不出所料，由于最高法院的判例法稀少且不明确，对这一问题做出裁决的法院意见不一。本文指出了判例法中的理论问题，并认为在坚持联邦制原则的同时使法律具有连贯性的唯一途径是在这些案件中不允许联邦普通法优先适用州侵权法。最后，本文提供了一个新的视角，说明为什么这也是一个正确的政策问题。在政策制定者几十年来无所作为之后，第二波气候侵权诉讼是诉诸法院要求气候正义的更大全球运动的一部分。当前气候破坏及其灾难性威胁的时代不仅需要新的和改进的法律和政策机制，还需要尽可能充分地利用现有机制，包括州侵权法。
一级标题
一、引言
二、第一波气候侵权案件
三、第二波气候侵权案件
四、联邦普通法中的公共妨害索赔和州侵权法
五、气候州侵权索赔的迫切需要
六、总结
【文章来源】Sokol, K. C. (2020). Seeking (some) climate justice in state tort law. Washington Law Review, 95(3), 1383-1440.
【下载链接】
版权归原作者、平台所有，仅用于学术分享，如有侵权请联系删除，谢谢！
【本站编辑：曾沅芷】
