The Delaware Valley Journal Reports:
Judge Calls Out ‘Sneaky’ Bucks Commissioners Over Lawsuit Targeting Oil Companies
Did Bucks County Democrats try to sneak their nuisance lawsuit targeting major oil companies past county voters?
That’s the allegation made, not by the lawyers, but by Bucks County Judge Stephen A. Corr during a hearing on the case Monday.
https://delawarevalleyjournal.com/category/energy/
If you thought climate litigation couldn’t get more farcical, let Bucks County prove you wrong. In what can only be described as a political theater piece disguised as legal action, the Democrat-controlled Bucks County Board of Commissioners has embarrassed itself with a lawsuit that is equal parts stealth, spectacle, and strategic cluelessness.
The spectacle began in March 2024, with Democrat commissioners Diane Ellis-Marseglia and Bob Harvie flanking token Republican Gene DiGirolamo (who quickly backed away like someone who smelled the nonsense a mile away). They announced a lawsuit against BP, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, ExxonMobil, Shell, and the American Petroleum Institute, accusing them of violating local “nuisance laws” and, get this—failing to adequately warn Bucks County residents about the supposed dangers of climate change.
Yes, because nothing screams “legal clarity” like trying to treat a gallon of unleaded like secondhand smoke.
The cherry on top? These climate crusaders tried to sneak the whole thing past the public by embedding their lawsuit authorization under the vague term “environmental litigation” in a January 2024 consent agenda. This procedural magic trick was so flagrant that even Judge Stephen Corr, hardly a flamethrower by nature, called it out. Corr didn’t mince words: “You’ve got to be kidding me,” he snapped at the county solicitor. He then summarized the commissioners’ move for what it was—“a sneaky way of doing it.”
But wait—it gets better.
The lawyer for Chevron, Frederick Santarelli, called the maneuver “undemocratic” and lambasted the commissioners for violating Pennsylvania’s Sunshine Act. Corr, who actually used to sit on a school board and knows how transparency is supposed to work, seemed genuinely appalled. “How can the public ask an intelligent question?” he asked. A fair point—assuming intelligent questions haven’t already been outlawed by the climate litigation crowd.
So what exactly is this lawsuit aiming to do? Oh, just fund public works projects like stormwater management and bridge repairs by extracting cash from oil companies. That’s right—Bucks County thinks it can pave its roads with climate hysteria and Chevron’s legal settlements.
Ted Boutrous, an attorney for Chevron, didn’t hold back either: “Virtually identical lawsuits have been dismissed by multiple federal and state courts across the country, including in Delaware, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, and California.” The precedent is clear: this kind of political performance art doesn’t belong in a county courtroom. As Boutrous rightly pointed out, “The claims are based on interstate and international emissions and, therefore, are precluded and preempted by federal law under clear U.S. Supreme Court precedent.”
Translation: This isn’t just bad policy. It’s legally incoherent.
Naturally, Bucks County’s legal team is spinning harder than a turbine in a wind farm. County lawyer Dan Flynn alleged oil companies ran a “disinformation campaign,” because apparently no one in 2024 understands that cars run on gas unless Big Oil spells it out in skywriting. Judge Corr wasn’t buying it. “What about me? I drive a car that burns gas,” he pointed out. Flynn responded with an artful dodge: “The court was not telling everybody to go burn gas. The defendants were.”
This, in a courtroom, is what passes for a compelling legal argument in 2025.
As for the real world—where grown-ups reside—Judge Corr reminded everyone that “we’re talking about emissions from all over the world.” A point so obvious it hurts to hear it repeated, and yet apparently not obvious enough for the commissioners who think Shell owes them new rain gutters.
The entire fiasco reeks of political opportunism cloaked in legal jargon. Bucks County isn’t trying to stop climate change—they’re chasing a payout. And they’re doing it with all the ethical grace of a Vegas conman.
Let’s recap: A climate activist nonprofit (Center for Climate Integrity) coordinated with Bucks officials via email prior to the lawsuit. The suit itself hides behind “environmental litigation” on a consent agenda. The commissioners talk about “transparency” while clearly avoiding it. And their legal strategy has already been tried—and laughed out of court—across half a dozen states.
Bucks County’s crusade is a microcosm of the broader climate litigation absurdity: legally bankrupt, ethically dubious, and politically motivated. This is not governance. This is green theater—badly acted and poorly reviewed.
Let’s hope Judge Corr’s written ruling delivers the final curtain call this performance deserves. Preferably with a laugh track.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
All these cases should be tossed as ex post facto laws as well as violating the federal commerce clause. The other issue is that most emissions are currently by foreign countries, and their state enterprises.
This reminds me of the skier Gus Schumacher who testified before Congress (invited by Sheldon Whitehouse) as an expert on climate change, where he faced tough questioning from Louisiana Senator John Kennedy. “Tough” being the kindest word that can be used to describe the excruciating debacle.
I enjoy watching Senator Kennedy on YouTube. My mostly liberal friends (living in Wokeachusetts after all) hate him. I like watching his southern folksiness and I respect his intelligence.
It’s what we call a “Hail Mary Litigation” and what needs to happen is go after the money funding it.
And the core little clique of promulgators behind this specific lawfare. Note in the “Related” links right after the main post text above is my April 11, 2024 WUWT guest post, “Another Cut and Paste Lawsuit: Pennsylvania Bucks County v. BP PLC, et al.” In that one, I explained how Bucks County v BP is nothing more than an essentially direct copy of City of Chicago v BP, which itself was no more than another lawsuit in a long lineage of them filed by the San Francisco law firm Sher Edling, where they rely on literally worthless ‘leaked industry documents’ in their claims that skeptic scientists were paid to put out disinformation. Trace this whole accusation effort back to its origins, and the entire lawfare effort could implode around the folks pushing it.
“spinning harder than a turbine in a wind farm”
That’s not very hard, most of the time.
That was my thought too! Maybe “spinning like a wind turbine in a hurricane.”
And by that, I mean the twisted bits of metal and fiberglass being whipped about! 😆😅🤣😂
Thank you. You posted before I started typing.
This will be (by my surely faulty count) the 22nd failed ‘public nuisance’ climate lawfare attempt. There were and remain three basic problems with this ‘theory’.
Lawyers getting rich off ‘climate harmed’ imaginary alarmists.
Mr. Istvan: I appreciate your effort in keeping track, even imprecise, because I find keeping count of such items just brings me down. Both sides know that, if you can’t win by vote, going to court is an option, but dems resort to it as a matter of tactics. I think the trend continues until trial judges see the benefit of quick dismissal and sanctions for the lawyers you mention.
These things are going to increase massivly.
Where can I get the best deal in popcorn futures?
Beer too, except Bud Lite. ;-))
Harviestoun Brewery Bitter and Twisted.
Well, the name fits the litigators.
Humor – a difficult concept.
— Lt. Saavik
So, more money that might have been put to productive use instead gets spent on legal fees. And it’s the ordinary person in the street who ultimately ends up paying for the lawyers on both sides.
Hopefully the defendant legal costs are covered in the decision and the plaintiffs, not the county, are forced to pay.
I’m assuming Bucks aint going to get the bucks.
I see no reason why these politicians shouldn’t be held personally responsible.