- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Score Board
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- SEC Score Board
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Trump Administration backs Chevron in Supreme Court fight over Louisiana coastal lawsuit
Posted on 9/16/25 at 8:07 am
Posted on 9/16/25 at 8:07 am
quote:
The Trump administration is siding with Chevron at the U.S. Supreme Court in a closely watched case related to Louisiana's coastal lawsuits and whether they should be heard in state or federal court.
In a brief filed with the court last week, U.S. Solicitor General John Sauer agreed with Chevron, which was recently ordered by a Plaquemines Parish jury to pay $745 million to restore state wetlands, that it should be allowed to fight that case and others in federal court, which is seen as a potentially friendlier venue for the oil giant.
The company has argued that federal court is the correct venue for cases of this type because they involve oil and gas production that was part of a federally sanctioned effort during World War II to make aviation fuel. Chevron and the companies it bought “worked for the federal government to refine aviation gasoline — a vital wartime product that powered Allied air forces to victory,” Sauer argued in the brief.
Plaquemines Parish, which sued the companies, has argued successfully in lower courts that the oil in question was not directly linked to wartime production and therefore the case should remain in state court.
The case before the Supreme Court relates to one of more than 40 similar lawsuits across south Louisiana, all spearheaded by Baton Rouge attorney John Carmouche of the law firm Talbot, Carmouche and Marcello, that seek damages from oil companies for coastal restoration.
The first of the cases was filed in 2013. Though the legal saga stretches back more than a decade, the new filing means that Gov. Jeff Landry and Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill are now on the opposite side of the case from the Trump administration.
Landry’s administration argued the case in Plaquemines alongside the parish and Carmouche, and Murrill has been outspoken in support of the litigation.
Murrill said Monday she is standing behind the lawsuits.
quote:
The Supreme Court is expected to hear the case in the fall. If it were to rule in favor of Chevron, some or all of the 40 cases in Louisiana could move from state to federal court.
quote:
Republican attorneys general from seven states, led by West Virginia Attorney General JB McCuskey, filed briefs arguing that the cases belong in federal rather than state court.
So did the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the Louisiana-based free-market think tank The Pelican Institute, and six Republican Senators, led by U.S. Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah.
The lawmakers argued in their brief that “a party acting on behalf of the federal government should not have to litigate claims in potentially hostile venues” referring to the local Louisiana parishes where the cases were filed.
LINK
Posted on 9/16/25 at 8:09 am to ragincajun03
quote:
he new filing means that Gov. Jeff Landry and Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill are now on the opposite side of the case from the Trump administration.
Landry’s administration argued the case in Plaquemines alongside the parish and Carmouche, and Murrill has been outspoken in support of the litigation.

Posted on 9/16/25 at 8:11 am to ragincajun03
quote:
cases of this type because they involve oil and gas production that was part of a federally sanctioned effort during World War II to make aviation fuel.
What portion of the extracted oil volume was used to make aviation fuel for the feds?
Was the oil extracted from state lands/waters or federal waters?
Posted on 9/16/25 at 8:11 am to ragincajun03
Start buying Pemex Fuel.
Posted on 9/16/25 at 8:12 am to GumboPot
quote:
What portion of the extracted oil volume was used to make aviation fuel for the feds?
Was the oil extracted from state lands/waters or federal waters?
I’m guessing IF those stats are still around, probably somewhere in court document?
Posted on 9/16/25 at 8:13 am to tketaco
quote:
Start buying Pemex Fuel.
Why does this matter? Most of us don't live in Mexico so it's kind of difficult.
This post was edited on 9/16/25 at 8:15 am
Posted on 9/16/25 at 8:14 am to ragincajun03
quote:
I’m guessing IF those stats are still around, probably somewhere in court document?
Chevon is obviously trying to pass the bill off to the feds, tax payers.
Posted on 9/16/25 at 8:17 am to ragincajun03
This ought to be a very interesting ruling by the DEI hire. If she can't define a woman because she's not a biologist I see no way she can be an expert on oil and gas, plus coastal erosion, and pollution, and wetlands.
Posted on 9/16/25 at 8:17 am to GumboPot
quote:
Chevon is obviously trying to pass the bill off to the feds, tax payers.
I think the question is: What were they permitted to do at that time? Did they follow the rules of said permit(s)?
Posted on 9/16/25 at 8:17 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
quote:he new filing means that Gov. Jeff Landry and Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill are now on the opposite side of the case from the Trump administration. Landry’s administration argued the case in Plaquemines alongside the parish and Carmouche, and Murrill has been outspoken in support of the litigation.
This is hilarious.
Posted on 9/16/25 at 8:17 am to GumboPot
quote:
Chevon is obviously trying to pass the bill off to the feds, tax payers.
No.
They're trying to have the case re-heard in federal court, which would likely lower their damage award. They're the ones paying, not tax payers.
Posted on 9/16/25 at 8:19 am to ragincajun03
quote:
restore state wetlands
That’s funny. Idiots in mud boats have done more damage to the Louisiana wetlands than any oil company ever has.
Posted on 9/16/25 at 8:25 am to ragincajun03
The state of Louisiana had to approve and issue permits to any and all petroleum industry entities to dredge canals in the coastal area. Is the state responsible for any damages?
Posted on 9/16/25 at 8:27 am to texag7
quote:
Idiots in mud boats have done more damage to the Louisiana wetlands than any oil company ever has.
Maybe. I don’t know.
But, I DO KNOW that those idiots in mud boats don’t have the cash Chevron and other oil companies have to get Carmouche and his firm huge paydays.
Posted on 9/16/25 at 8:38 am to ragincajun03
What’s the link between O&G and wetlands destruction?
Because most of the wetlands loss has come from dredging the Mississippi
Because most of the wetlands loss has come from dredging the Mississippi
Posted on 9/16/25 at 8:59 am to TFH
quote:
What’s the link between O&G and wetlands destruction?
From what I understand, lots of canals were dug throughout the wetlands to allow vessel passage between various petrochemical resources decades ago. A lot the marshland was crisscrossed with many passageways which have eroded over time and compounded the wetland loss. The river being levied up and dumping all it's silt into the GOA doesn't help either though.
This post was edited on 9/16/25 at 9:00 am
Posted on 9/16/25 at 9:15 am to texag7
quote:
That’s funny. Idiots in mud boats have done more damage to the Louisiana wetlands than any oil company ever has.
Louisiana should sue the Army Corp of Engineers next for the Levees along the Mississippi river. I mean how much damage has been done to wetlands due to the Mississippi not being able to deposit sediment - or does Landry and his trial lawyer buddies not care about that?
Posted on 9/16/25 at 9:16 am to ragincajun03
quote:
to get Carmouche and his firm huge paydays.
don't forget Landry's cut.... i mean campaign contributions...
Popular
Back to top

13









