Insights Search

An oil major (“the Company”) filed suit in federal court on October 24, 2025, challenging California’s Climate Laws — the Climate Corporate Data Accountability Act (“SB 253”) and the Climate-Related Financial Risk Act (“SB 261”) — on the basis that the laws violate the Company’s First Amendment rights.

In a potential watershed moment that could reverberate across companies that have set climate goals or made claims regarding climate ambitions (e.g., “net zero” or carbon neutrality), on October 23, 2025, a European oil major (the “Company”) was handed a potentially significant greenwashing ruling by the Paris Judicial Court (the “Court”), which found the Company’s claims about its role in the energy transition and its net zero ambitions were likely to mislead consumers.

On September 30, 2025, U.S. District Judge Reed O’Connor entered final judgment following a bench trial in a class-action lawsuit against American Airlines and its Employee Benefits Committee (the “EBC”), finding the defendants breached their duty of loyalty under the Employee Retirement Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”) by allowing an investment manager’s environmental, social and governance (“ESG”) objectives to influence its investment decisions with respect to the company’s retirement plans (the “Plan”).

In the latest round of developments regarding California’s Climate Laws—SB 253 and SB 261—the California Air Resources Board (“CARB”) posted a Notice to its website on October 14, 2025, deferring its initial rulemaking on the laws until the first quarter of 2026 in response to the large volume of public comments it has received.

On May 1, 2025, the federal government brought separate suits against both New York and Vermont alleging that these state’s “climate Superfund” statutes are unconstitutional on multiple grounds.

On April 8, 2025, President Trump issued an Executive Order titled “Protecting American Energy From State Overreach” (the “Executive Order”), which directs the United States Attorney General to identify and halt the enforcement of state laws and civil actions that burden energy production and may be preempted by Federal law or are otherwise unconstitutional.

Delaware amended the Delaware General Corporation Law (the “DGCL”) to create safe harbors for transactions involving directors, officers and controlling stockholders and to limit both the documents subject to and the purposes of books and records requests.

In a move that perhaps comes as no surprise, on March 27, 2025, the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC” or “the Commission”) issued Press Release 2025-58 announcing it had voted to end its defense of its climate-related disclosures rules (The Enhancement and Standardization of Climate-Related Disclosures for Investors).

The past few years have seen concerted efforts — both domestically and globally — advancing the reporting and disclosure of various climate- and sustainability-related metrics by businesses and investors.

On February 26, 2025, the Supreme Court and all three counsel appearing before it in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, appeared to walk away in “radical agreement” — as noted by Justice Neil Gorsuch — that a majority-group plaintiff is not required to proffer more evidence of discrimination than a non-majority-group plaintiff in order to state a prima facie claim under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

On February 21, 2025, a federal judge issued a nationwide preliminary injunction that partially prevents the Trump administration from enforcing its executive orders on diversity, equity and inclusion (“DEI”).