An Anne Arundel circuit judge dismissed Annapolis and Anne Arundel County’s suits against energy industry giants in their pursuit of damages from the effects of climate change.

Judge Steven Platt issued his ruling on Jan. 23. At the last hearing on the cases in October, representatives from Chevron and other energy companies argued that the claims should be dismissed.

The plaintiffs argued the energy companies deceived the public about the effects of fossil fuels on the environment and were in part responsible for the damage incurred by climate catastrophes, such as flooding and sea level rise.

Sher Edling, a California law firm, has represented many jurisdictions across the country in these “climate deception” cases, including in Baltimore. The Baltimore case was dismissed by Circuit Judge Videtta A. Brown in July last year.

In her analysis, Brown wrote that the claims brought by the city and county were not subject to state law, which is preempted by the federal Clean Air Act.

“Global pollution-based complaints were never intended by Congress to be handled by individual states,” Brown wrote.

Platt said that Brown’s decision, as well as others dismissing similar claims in Delaware, New York and the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, persuaded him.

“The States such as Plaintiffs here, the City of Annapolis and the County of Anne Arundel can participate in the effort to limit emissions collaboratively, but not in the form of litigation,” Platt stated in his memorandum.

“The Court’s decision joins the growing and nearly unanimous consensus, among both federal and states [sic] courts across the country, that these types of claims are precluded and preempted by federal law and must be dismissed under clear U.S. Supreme Court precedent,” Theodore J. Boutrous Jr., who represented Chevron in the Annapolis and Anne Arundel County litigation, said in a statement.

Courts nationwide are divided on these claims. Though some of the climate deception suits have been successfully fought by the defendants, not all have been. Cases in Massachusetts, Hawaii, Connecticut, Vermont and other jurisdictions are proceeding.

Jacqueline Guild, deputy city manager of Resilience and Sustainability, did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

As for what comes next, Annapolis hasn’t decided whether to appeal Platt’s decision or refile in a new jurisdiction.

“At this juncture, the City Attorney is keeping options open for what comes next. The basis for the litigation was to hold the companies to account for the damage their products have caused, which will result in significant and ongoing infrastructure costs to hold back floodwaters along our nearly two dozen miles of coastline,” an Annapolis spokesperson told the Capital Gazette.

However, the county plans to appeal Platt’s decision.

“While we respect the Court’s decision, the County will continue to pursue these important remedies in the appellate courts,” County Attorney Gregory Swain said in an email.

Have a news tip? Contact Racquel Bazos at rbazos@baltsun.com, 443-813-0770 or on X as @rzbworks.