PRESS RELEASE: Heartland Experts React to Exxon Climate Case Victory in New York
“Unable to prevail in the court of scientific debate or the court of public opinion, climate alarmists made a desperate attempt to prevail in courts of law. They failed spectacularly, as they have everywhere else, which is fitting.” - James Taylor
ARLINGTON HEIGHTS, IL (December 10, 2019) – Today, ExxonMobil Corp. won a legal victory over the state of New York, which claimed the company had committed securities fraud by supposedly misleading investors about the impact of fossil fuels on climate change.
New York Supreme Court Justice Barry Ostrager wrote in a 55-page decision that New York Attorney General Letitia James had “failed to prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that ExxonMobil made any material misstatements or omissions about its practices and procedures that misled any reasonable investor.”
The following statements from environment and energy experts at The Heartland Institute – a national free-market think tank – may be used for attribution. For more comments, refer to the contact information below. To book a Heartland guest on your program, please contact Media Specialist Billy Aouste at email@example.com and 312/377-4000.
“In this highly touted planet-saving ‘ExxonKnew’ trial, the New York Attorney General failed to clear the lowest bar ever established for such matters, the New York Martin Act, which empowers the attorney general to target a wide range of corporate behavior that could have hurt shareholders. According to the judge, the prosecutors ‘produced no testimony either from any investor who claimed to have been misled by any disclosure.’
“This result is what happens when law enforcement launches abusive investigations and prosecution at the behest of private non-profit groups like Bill McKibben and 350.org, donors, and climate-engaged political hacks. They really didn't have a clue about the burden of proof needed, much like the entire climate scare itself.”
“Unable to prevail in the court of scientific debate or the court of public opinion, climate alarmists made a desperate attempt to prevail in courts of law. They failed spectacularly, as they have everywhere else, which is fitting.
“Carbon dioxide and warmer temperatures benefit human health, human welfare, crop production, and weather stability. All the propaganda and ambulance-chasing legal theories in the world won’t stop that.”
“This was never about climate science or protecting investors. It was about New York looking for another deep-pocketed industry to soak for the ever-rising costs of its socialist policies.
“Nobody can predict with any credible accuracy what the global climate will look like 50 or 100 years from now and what changes will take place. What Exxon did, and consistently has done, is let investors and possible investors know that oil and gas are critical fuels and will remain so for decades to come – therefore, Exxon will be still be around and still be profitable. This is a truth that investors will be able to rely upon, unless politicians intervene to put them out of business.”