“Fossil fuel companies knew the damage they were doing. They spent decades denying it,” said Daryl McCool, a Marshall Fire survivor who lived in Superior for nearly 30 years. “We must hold them accountable before it's too late for more families, more neighbors, and more communities.”

“I’m not a lawyer, I’m a fire survivor,” said Jenny Singer-Rupp, a Marshall Fire survivor who lost everything in the fire. “I know the costs of a disaster don’t disappear when the flames are out.” “Let the evidence be heard, let survivors have their day in court. We deserve accountability."

“I believe my state has a right and duty to protect my health and hold corporations like Suncor responsible for the damage they've caused,” said Alina Miranda, who lost her home and pets in the Marshall Fire. “The Supreme Court should not take away the ability of my local government to protect me.”

"The Marshall Fire left lasting scars on our community and shattered my sense of safety,” said Madison Schink, who still experiences anxiety after the fire and now lives near a Suncor refinery. “There’s no doubt in my mind that Big Oil has fundamentally altered how I experience everyday life.”

“Before there’s a case number, there’s a life that matters,” said Zaire Calvin, who lost his sister, Evelyn McClendon, in the Eaton Fire. “We can build another house. We can’t bring back my sister’s life.” From Altadena to Boulder, communities deserve their day in court to hold Big Oil accountable.

"Boulder is asking who should pay for the damage: Families and taxpayers alone, or the companies responsible," said Zaire Calvin, a lifelong Altadena resident who lost both his home and his sister, Evelyn McClendon, in the Eaton Fire. "I understand the human weight behind that question."

"It's been hotter. It's been drier. Our river for the first time in anybody's memory: puddles," said Deirdre Macnab, a cattle rancher from Colorado. "There is no food. It is very frightening." Big Oil has lied about the climate harms of its products for decades and must be held accountable.

“I am one of the ranchers that are bankrupted out of the cattle business,” said Dr. Kathryn Bedell, a Colorado rancher of 27 years. "There’s no forage for the cattle, there’s no water to grow feed, and it’s too hot and dry to keep them any longer. So, I’m done."

There should be consequences for lying to the public. Big Oil did it systematically for decades and they’re pushing for a “get out of jail free” card to avoid having to admit that in front of a jury.

New blog from Laura Peterson publishes emails obtained through an open records request and reveals that some groups involved in the disinformation campaign at the heart of Boulder’s climate accountability lawsuit are shopping legislation to shield the fossil fuel industry from liability.

Survivors of climate-fueled wildfires urged the Supreme Court to let Boulder’s Big Oil lawsuit go forward. “It is profoundly unfair that oil companies keep the profits while me and my neighbors are left with the losses … After everything my community has been through, we deserve our day in court.”

“They Knew, They Lied”: Fire survivors bring their fight to the Supreme Court’s steps. As justices weighed the merits of Boulder’s case against Big Oil, those who lost everything want accountability.

"All Boulder is trying to do is get oil companies to help pay for the costs of their allegedly vast deception around the causes of climate change—still needing to be determined in court."

“Boulder’s case is about holding corporations accountable for deceptive conduct, and the people of Boulder should have their day in court to present the evidence of Exxon and Suncor’s deception.”

"...it’s no wonder the fossil fuel industry appears desperate to avoid ... the courtroom. A long, well-documented history of deception about how much they knew about the harms that the burning of their products causes to people and the planet only adds to their vulnerability." 💯💯💯

“Of those justices hearing the first case of the new term, several appeared outwardly skeptical of whether the case was properly before the justices and a majority appeared uninterested in the most broad constitutional argument the companies put forth against allowing the litigation.”