This summer myself, Professor Arpitha Kodiveri and Jacques Abou-Rizk (a fellow researcher) analyzed the current state of climate damage-based litigation, with a specific emphasis on damages caused by heatwave events, both domestic and international. The field of climate litigation is rapidly growing and contrasting the accessibility of these kinds of legal remedies in richer countries versus poorer ones sheds light on the inequality that is pervasive throughout the climate action world. While some countries see this litigation as a silver bullet for climate change, our research indicated otherwise for the time being. 

We focused our domestic research on an ongoing climate suit out of Multnomah, OR against fossil fuel major Exxon Mobil. The county alleges that Exxon knowingly engaged in the sale and production of fossil fuel products despite the adverse climate impacts that would follow. The county alleges that Exxon’s actions directly contributed to a deadly 2021 heatwave event in the region. While visiting Portland we were able to meet with local climate activists and professors who shed light on the unprecedented speed of the case. Unlike most suits of its kind, the case in Oregon has avoided being escalated to the federal level, despite Exxon’s wishes, and will continue in a more favorable jurisdiction. The county is seeking $50 million in damages, $1.5 billion for future damages, and $50 billion for an abatement fund aimed at preventing future heat waves. 

While the case, and litigation more generally, seems promising, we contrasted it with situations like the one in Bangladesh, which experienced a heatwave in the spring of 2024 where average temperatures broke 105°. Litigation is much less viable in these regions due to the lack of funding and public attention. Our research concluded that accessibility must be prioritized if litigation is to be an effective remedy internationally.