Puerto Rico’s Battle Against Big Oil: Hurricane Maria Lawsuit and Its Legal Aftermath
Puerto Rico's historic lawsuit against oil majors over climate-driven hurricane damages is dismissed on technical grounds, sparking new debates and appeals.
Puerto Rico’s Lawsuit Against Oil Majors: Seeking Accountability for Hurricane Maria
In a landmark legal move, 37 municipalities in Puerto Rico banded together to sue some of the world’s largest oil companies, alleging their business practices and misinformation were directly responsible for augmenting the devastating impact of Hurricane Maria in 2017. The lawsuit, filed in 2022 and amended in 2023, marked a rare attempt to hold fossil fuel giants accountable for climate change–driven disasters. While the case ultimately was dismissed, it ignited a high-profile debate about legal responsibility, climate justice, and the technicalities of the U.S. judicial system.
Background: Hurricane Maria’s Destruction and the Origins of the Suit
Hurricane Maria swept through Puerto Rico in September 2017, leaving behind unprecedented destruction, estimated at $115 billion in damages—making it the fourth-costliest weather event in U.S. history. The storm killed nearly 3,000 people, displaced thousands more, and crippled the island’s infrastructure.
- Total municipal plaintiffs: 37 cities and towns including Bayamón, Caguas, Loíza, Lares, Barranquitas, Comerío, Cayey, Las Marías, Trujillo Alto, Vega Baja, and more.
- Main targets: Exxon Mobil, Shell, Chevron, BP, Motiva Enterprises, Occidental Petroleum, BHP Group, Rio Tinto, ConocoPhillips, and the American Petroleum Institute.
- Central allegation: Oil majors conspired to engage in business practices and misrepresented the risks of fossil fuel products, directly leading to climate impacts that intensified Hurricane Maria’s destruction.
The Legal Basis: Racketeering, Conspiracy, and Climate Accountability
The suit invoked federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) statutes and Puerto Rico’s Civil Code, arguing that oil companies formed a corrupt enterprise to unfairly block clean energy and deceive the public about climate risks. The municipalities relied heavily on recent climate science reports, including a Columbia University study identifying the carbon footprints and roles of major fossil fuel producers.
- RICO Claim: Plaintiffs alleged a long-running conspiracy by oil majors to mislead the public and obstruct cleaner energy solutions, thus fueling more destructive climate events.
- Antitrust Theory: The suit suggested that these companies rigged the energy marketplace in favor of fossil fuels, worsening climate harms.
- Damages Sought: Compensation for infrastructure losses, community disruption, and public health crises attributed to Hurricane Maria and subsequent storms.
Dismissal of the Case: Statute of Limitations Overshadows the Merits
On September 13, 2025, U.S. District Judge Silvia Carreño Coll dismissed the municipalities’ lawsuit against Big Oil. The ruling centered not on the substantive claims or the evidence against the companies, but rather on a procedural technicality: the lawsuit was filed too late under both Puerto Rico’s Civil Code (one-year limit for damages) and the federal RICO Act (four-year limit for racketeering claims).
| Legal Issue | Judge’s Finding | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Statute of Limitations | Exceeded (lawsuit filed after allowed period) | Entire case dismissed without considering merits |
| Jurisdiction | Lack over certain companies (Occidental, BHP, Rio Tinto) | No grounds for trial against those parties |
| Public Knowledge | Plaintiffs “knew or should have known” whom to sue by 2021 | Delayed filing undermined claims under law |
What others are reading
Judge Carreño Coll emphasized that her decision did not examine the merits or the plausibility of the municipalities’ arguments. Instead, it was strictly a procedural ruling. “It regularly occurs in dismissing a pleading under the applicable statutes of limitation that we judges remember that ‘it is the duty of all courts of law to ensure that, for the general welfare of the community, difficult cases do not produce incorrect law,” she wrote, acknowledging the profound suffering caused by the hurricanes.
Public Reaction: Disappointment and Determination to Appeal
The dismissal frustrated proponents of climate accountability, who argued that the timing bar unfairly protected oil companies from scrutiny for their alleged misconduct.
- Aaron Regunberg, director of Public Citizen’s Climate Accountability Project, lamented the victims of Hurricane Maria “will not see justice in this case from the Big Oil companies whose reckless and deceptive conduct drove climate change and the resulting disasters.”
- Legal analysts clarified: The dismissal was procedural, not an endorsement or refutation of the suit’s substantive claims.
- Puerto Rico municipalities announced their intent to appeal, hoping for a reevaluation that considers the underlying accusations and evidence, rather than solely the timing.
Oil Companies Respond: Focus on Technicalities and Policy
Legal representatives for the oil companies, including Chevron and others, welcomed the ruling, highlighting its foundation in longstanding statutes and public knowledge about fossil fuel impacts. Theodore Boutrous Jr., a Chevron attorney, remarked, “The court correctly ruled the claims were long-since time-barred, because ‘there is overwhelming evidence of public knowledge of articles, reports, and cases’ making the same allegations many years before these plaintiffs’ belated lawsuit.”
Boutrous and others argued that the civil justice system should resolve live disputes rather than “attack and second-guess policy resolutions that have been widely discussed and grappled with openly since Lyndon B. Johnson was president.”
Legal and Scientific Context: Climate Litigation’s Evolution
Puerto Rico’s suit was part of a broader wave of climate litigation targeting fossil fuel companies globally. Plaintiffs in these cases leverage growing scientific evidence about the link between greenhouse gas emissions and escalating extreme weather events.
- Key scientific support: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) estimates, academic studies tracing carbon footprints, and mounting consensus on climate change’s impacts on hurricanes.
- Legal trend: Municipalities and states increasingly pursue civil and racketeering claims against fossil fuel producers, seeking damages and industry reform.
- Challenges: Statutes of limitations, jurisdictional questions, and proving causality remain major hurdles.
Future Prospects: Appeal and the Path Ahead
Despite the dismissal, Puerto Rican municipalities signal a robust commitment to appealing the technical ruling. Legal experts believe future cases may proceed more promptly, informed by recent setbacks, and potentially test evolving standards in climate accountability litigation.
- Grounds for appeal: The municipalities may argue that recent revelations and research constitute “new evidence” that should reset the statutory clock, or that procedural rules were improperly applied.
- Wider implications: The case’s procedural dismissal does not foreclose future suits, as similar racketeering and climate claims continue progressing elsewhere.
- Community impact: Mayors and citizen advocates remain focused on securing resources for rebuilding and acknowledging the role of industrial actors in climate devastation.
Wider Takeaways: Climate Accountability, Justice, and Legal Barriers
Puerto Rico’s lawsuit underscored key themes at the intersection of climate science, policy, corporate responsibility, and legal constraints:
- The increasing willingness of local governments to pursue complex litigation against transnational fossil fuel companies.
- Legal technicalities frequently dominate the outcome of climate accountability suits, often leaving substantive claims untested.
- The statute of limitations remains a potent challenge, demanding strategic legal timing and swift action by affected communities.
- Scientific evidence linking emissions to disasters is mounting, yet the translation to judicial remedies remains uncertain.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
Q: Who were the main defendants in Puerto Rico’s lawsuit?
The suit was filed against Exxon Mobil, Shell, Chevron, BP, Motiva Enterprises, Occidental Petroleum, BHP Group, Rio Tinto, ConocoPhillips, and the American Petroleum Institute.
Q: Why was the lawsuit dismissed?
The case was dismissed on procedural grounds: it was filed after the statute of limitations had expired, not based on the merits of the municipalities’ arguments.
Q: Does the dismissal affect future climate lawsuits?
No. The decision confirms the importance of timing but does not undermine the legal arguments about the role of fossil fuel companies in climate disasters. Cases filed within legal deadlines may continue.
Q: What damages did Hurricane Maria cause?
Maria led to an estimated $115 billion in damages, the deaths of nearly 3,000 residents, and lasting physical, economic, and social impacts across Puerto Rico.
Q: Will Puerto Rico appeal the decision?
Yes. The municipalities plan to appeal, seeking a review of the statute of limitations ruling and a hearing on their substantive claims.
Summary Table: Puerto Rico v. Big Oil—Key Facts
| Year of Hurricane | Year Lawsuit Filed | Defendants | Main Legal Issues | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2017 | 2022 (amended 2023) | Exxon, Shell, Chevron, BP, etc. | Racketeering, conspiracy, climate accountability | Dismissed—statute of limitations |
Conclusion: The Ongoing Quest for Climate Justice in Puerto Rico
Puerto Rico’s attempt to hold Big Oil accountable for hurricane devastation spotlights the difficulties of pursuing environmental justice through courts. Technical legal barriers, such as statutes of limitations and jurisdiction requirements, often shape outcomes more than substantive arguments about causality, corporate conduct, or scientific facts. The debate continues as municipalities appeal, advocates push for greater accountability, and the impact of Hurricane Maria remains vivid in Puerto Rico’s collective memory.
References
- https://www.elnuevodia.com/english/news/story/federal-court-dismisses-lawsuit-filed-37-municipalities-blaming-oil-companies-for-hurricane-maria-damages/
- https://www.citizen.org/news/dismissal-of-puerto-rico-climate-lawsuit-is-procedural-not-on-the-merits/
- https://www.legalnewsline.com/federal-courts/oil-companies-beat-rico-lawsuit-over-hurricane-maria/article_95b88a95-3a19-4b99-a6c3-5cd9fa5e36e8.html
- https://climateintegrity.org/news/view/puerto-rico-municipalities-to-appeal-technical-dismissal-of-big-oil-lawsuit
- https://climatecasechart.com/case/municipalities-of-puerto-rico-v-exxon-mobil-corp/
- https://climateintegrity.org/news/view/puerto-rico-drops-climate-lawsuit-to-align-with-the-protection-of-oil-companies
- https://cablj.org/puerto-rico-fights-back-against-big-oils-big-lies/
Similar Articles
Read full bio of Sneha Tete
