Federal Officer Removal Statute-Climate Change Litigation

7^th Circuit Court of Appeals

Case Name: City of Chicago v. BP P.L.C.

Case No.: 25-1916

Officials: Hamilton, Maldonado, and Taibleson, Circuit Judges.

Focus: Federal Officer Removal Statute-Climate Change Litigation

In March 2024, the City of Chicago filed suit against several major fossil fuel companies and an industry trade association, alleging that they misrepresented the effects of fossil fuel emissions on climate change. According to the complaint, these misrepresentations encouraged greater fossil fuel consumption, causing the City to incur increased costs associated with illness, property damage, and environmental harm. Chicago seeks damages only for injuries allegedly resulting from increased fossil fuel use attributable to the defendants’ misinformation and expressly excludes claims based on federal property or the defendants’ sales of specialized fuels to the federal government.

The defendants removed the action from Illinois state court to the Northern District of Illinois under the federal officer removal statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1442(a)(1). They argued that their production and supply of fossil fuels for the federal government established the requisite federal connection. The district court rejected that argument, concluding that the alleged misconduct underlying the complaint was too attenuated from the defendants’ federal activities to support federal officer jurisdiction, and remanded the case to state court.

The Seventh Circuit reviewed the remand order de novo found that the federal officer removal statute did not authorize removal because Chicago’s claims centered on alleged misrepresentations to consumers and the resulting non-federal harms, not on conduct undertaken pursuant to the defendants’ work for the federal government. The court further emphasized that the complaint expressly disclaimed any injuries arising from federal activities and found its conclusion consistent with decisions from other federal courts of appeals addressing similar climate-related actions. Accordingly, the court remanded the case to state court.

Affirmed.

Decided 07/15/26

Full Text