Today, the U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments in Plaquemines Parish v. Chevron USA, Inc., about whether state or federal court is the proper venue to handle state claims alleging environmental harm against a federal contractor.
While the Court’s opinion is not expected for several months, its ruling could reshape the decade-long legal battle between Louisiana parishes and energy companies, which has earned the state a reputation as one of the nation’s worst Judicial Hellholes®.
“This case highlights the urgent need for impartial courts and a fair forum for defendants,” said Lauren Sheets Jarrell, Vice President and Counsel for Civil Justice Policy at the American Tort Reform Association. “For years, politically influenced local courts and private law firms have manipulated the legal process for profit — this case could finally put meaningful limits on that abuse.”
ATRA submitted a friend of the court brief arguing that Louisiana’s coastal litigation proves the importance of federal officer removal and that state government lawyers’ prejudgment of the petitioners’ federal defenses demonstrate the need for a federal forum. Jarrell recently discussed the Plaquemines case and the points made in ATRA’s amicus brief in detail during a panel hosted by the Washington Legal Foundation, which can be viewed here.
A Decade of Litigation and a Historic Verdict
The Supreme Court’s decision will impact more than 40 lawsuits filed by Louisiana parishes against more than 200 energy companies which claim the companies’ oil and gas drilling operations, conducted under World War II-era federal directives, contributed to coastal erosion.
The lawsuits started a decade ago, but received national attention last year when a Plaquemines Parish jury returned a $744 million award
In the first case to go to trial, a Plaquemines Parish jury returned a $744 million verdict last year, sparking national attention and direct criticism from the White House. In response, President Trump issued an Executive Order, “Protecting American Energy from State Overreach,” warning that state-level lawsuits threaten U.S. energy dominance by imposing retroactive, punitive penalties.
Former Attorney General Bill Barr also sent a letter to Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill, questioning the state’s legal theory and warning that Louisiana officials were attempting to “double dip” by blaming coastal erosion on federal activity while seeking additional payouts from private companies.
A Flawed “Joint Prosecution Agreement” Highlights Bias Concerns
In 2016, then-Attorney General Jeff Landry and several coastal parishes entered into a Joint Prosecution Agreement that required all government parties — including future attorneys general — to “uniformly reject all defenses” raised by energy defendants, including federal ones, regardless of merit. While campaigning for governor, Landry promised trial lawyers they would have “nothing to fear” with him as governor.
The Carmouche Law Firm, which represents most parishes involved in the litigation, helped draft and sign this agreement as its partners made major political donations to Gov. Landry and other state officials, including to the judge who presided over the Plaquemines Parish case.
“This agreement shows that these cases aren’t about justice — they’re about enriching politically connected plaintiffs’ lawyers at the expense of Louisiana families and the state’s vital energy sector,” Sheets Jarrell said. “The conflicts of interest are clear: Governor Landry long has supported the coastal litigation and maintains close ties to the same lawyers driving it.”
Gov. Landry received at least $75,000 in contributions funneled through John Carmouche’s law firm and network, then appointed Carmouche to the Louisiana State University Board of Supervisors, which includes access to the LSU board suite at football games and unique business and political networking opportunities.
Broader Consequences for Louisiana’s Economy
Recent data shows that Louisiana families pay more than $4,000 per year in a “tort tax”, with nearly 40,000 jobs lost annually due to excessive litigation. For a family of four in New Orleans, that cost soars above $8,000 per year.
“The outcome of this case will have ripple effects beyond the courtroom,” Sheets Jarrell said. “A ruling that reinforces the need for federal oversight could restore balance — protecting jobs, energy production, and the rule of law.”
ATRA will continue monitoring the case as the Supreme Court deliberates in the coming months.
