There is an alarming — and growing — trend in the United States where local governments sue manufacturers and other businesses to get money to pay for local societal or environmental problems. The companies they sue generally did nothing to unlawfully cause these harms: The governments just want money. But that is not how the law is supposed to work, and these lawsuits threaten American ingenuity and Maryland jobs.

Maryland is at the center of several of these lawsuits. Right now, Baltimore City is bringing two of them. The city is suing energy manufacturers to pay for its climate adaptation costs and separately suing plastic manufacturers for the costs of cleaning up community litter. Annapolis and Anne Arundel County have filed similar climate cases.

These lawsuits often make headlines because they deal with important societal and political issues. But that does not mean that liability is appropriate or beneficial for our state or country. American manufacturers operate in highly competitive global economic environments. Forcing manufacturers to pay local governments billions of dollars for harms they did not cause will have a crippling effect on the sector. Every dollar spent on these lawsuits means less money for research and development, innovation, jobs and thriving communities. These lawsuits come at a cost.

Take, for example, climate change litigation. The three lawsuits here in Maryland are among 30 or so lawsuits around the country where local and state governments are suing various combinations of energy companies over the costs of climate change. By and large, the suits allege that selling us the energy we use every day to fuel our cars, turn on our lights, power our factories and so much more makes the companies responsible for the governments’ climate adaptation costs.

But electrification, transportation fuel and other types of energy have made modern life possible, powering the technology that has transformed human health and well-being across the globe. The challenge of our time is figuring out how to source and use energy in ways that are sustainable for both our people and planet.

Indeed, figuring out how to meaningfully address the causes and impacts of climate change are — for good reason — at the center of important, high-level national and international policy-making. To help communities like those in Maryland, the federal government has made $41.8 billion available for resilience and environmental mitigation efforts. The vast majority of that money has not yet been allocated or spent, but Baltimore City and other counties and municipalities are plowing ahead with litigation.

Fortunately, courts are starting to recognize the issue. In 2021, in response to a similar lawsuit brought by New York City, federal courts explained that no company or industry can be held legally responsible for causing climate change. The case was thrown out and the ruling was not appealed.

This summer, the judge hearing Baltimore City’s case reached a similar conclusion, dismissing the case in its entirety. As she explained, imposing liability on energy companies for the use of their products around the world is effectively regulating and penalizing global production, marketing and sales of those fuels. That, she said, is beyond the scope of state liability law.

Local government leaders in Maryland should heed these rulings. American manufacturers are not rainy day funds for infrastructure needs around the country. To the contrary, they have an important role to play in solving these generational problems by developing technologies that can reduce emissions and mitigate damages. It is time for Maryland’s local governments to stop the baseless lawsuits and start working with manufacturers on real solutions to the problems facing our communities.

Mary D. Kane is the president and CEO of the Maryland Chamber of Commerce. Phil Goldberg is special counsel for the Manufacturers’ Accountability Project.