BOSTON (Legal Newsline) - The Massachusetts Supreme Court allowed the state’s climate lawsuit to proceed, rejecting ExxonMobil’s attempt to dismiss the case under a law written to discourage litigation designed to retaliate against public speech.
The state’s so-called anti-SLAPP law (for Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) doesn’t apply to Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey, the state high court ruled. While the law refers to either “party” in a case, the Supreme Court said in a May 24 decision, legislators didn’t include the AG in that definition.
The AG’s office sued ExxonMobil under a variety of theories including allegations it fraudulently misled consumers into consuming fossil fuels by funding editorials and other content designed to reduce concerns about global warming. ExxonMobil said the lawsuit is retaliation for its participation in public debate.
The question is moot, the Massachusetts Supreme Court said, since ExxonMobil can’t use the law to protect itself against the AG’s action.
“Construing the anti-SLAPP statute to apply to the Attorney General would place significant roadblocks to the enforcement of the Commonwealth’s laws,” the court ruled. In another statute in the same chapter as the anti-SLAPP law, the court said, legislators provided for recovering legal fees from state officers, showing lawmakers knew how to include the AG in legislation if they intended it.
The court didn’t comment on the merits of the state’s lawsuit.