hold on there's just too much going on in Congress lmao...
Prohibits lawsuits against energy companies for climate change damages.
Introduced by Senator Cruz (R-TX), with Sens. Budd (R-NC), Cotton (R-AR), and Lee (R-UT).
Introduced in the Senate, referred to committee.
This bill aims to prevent any legal action, including lawsuits or enforcing state laws, that seeks damages or other relief from energy companies for alleged climate change harms. Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) introduced it in the Senate, along with three Republican co-sponsors, and it has been sent to a committee for review. This means it's in an early stage and has not yet been voted on by the full Senate.
Introduced Apr 16, 2026
This bill was introduced in the Senate on April 16, 2026, and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. For it to become law, the committee must first approve it, then the full Senate must vote on it. If it passes the Senate, it would then go to the House of Representatives for a vote, and finally to the President for signature.
If this bill becomes law, you would no longer see new lawsuits filed against companies involved in mining, producing, transporting, or selling energy (like oil, gas, or coal) for damages related to climate change. Any state laws that currently require these companies to pay for climate-related costs would become invalid. Furthermore, any such lawsuits or legal actions already underway in federal or state courts would be immediately thrown out by the court.
Supporters Say
Supporters argue the bill ensures affordable energy, strengthens national security, and prevents states from overstepping federal authority on emissions.
Critics Say
Critics would likely argue that states should retain the ability to hold energy companies accountable for climate impacts and pursue environmental remedies.
The bill's proponents believe it is necessary to develop all energy sources, make the U.S. energy self-sufficient, and provide affordable energy. They argue that state lawsuits against energy companies for global emissions lack scientific basis, unfairly impose retroactive liability, strain the judiciary, and undermine national security. Those who would oppose the bill would likely counter these claims, arguing that states have a legitimate role in holding companies accountable for environmental harms and that climate science supports the basis for such lawsuits.