Researchers Call For Charging Big Oil With Homicide
Do you think major oil companies should be charged with homicide?
What’s the story?
- A new paper published in the Harvard Environmental Law Review calls for holding big oil companies accountable for homicide.
- The authors argue that the companies “have not simply been lying to the public, they have been killing members of the public at an accelerating rate, and prosecutors should bring that crime to the public’s attention.” The paper is rooted in the growing conversation that fossil fuel companies have known about the harm they have been causing for decades.
- The report lays out the case for multiple types of homicide charges, which range from manslaughter to murder. David Arkush, one of the paper’s leading contributors, said the companies come “extremely close” to meeting the definition of murder because of their awareness of the harm.
What they’re saying
- Donald Braman, a law professor at George Washington University and co-author, spoke of the “culpable mental state” that has inflicted harm on people, including death, as the companies delay climate regulations.
“Once you start using those terms, you realize that’s criminal law. Culpable mental state causing harm is criminal conduct, and if they kill anybody, that’s homicide.”
- Braman continues to explain that homicide chargers would have a significant impact and outstanding penalties for the industry, further than just paying fines.
- The authors argue that attribution science — a field of research frequently used in climate studies to discover how much climate change is responsible for extreme weather — helps the paper’s case. Various studies have found that climate change is connected to the worsening of extreme weather events and their death tolls.
- In response to the study, a spokesperson for the American Petroleum Institute wrote in an email:
“The record of the past two decades demonstrates that the industry has achieved its goal of providing affordable, reliable American energy to US consumers while substantially reducing emissions and our environmental footprint. Any suggestion to the contrary is false.”
What’s next?
- While pursuing homicide chargers would be challenging, it isn't unheard of. BP was charged with manslaughter after the 2010 Deepwater Horizon disaster that killed over 10 people and paid billions in fines and penalties.
- If a case were to be brought forward against oil companies, there would need to be a strong argument for the harm done. Christopher Kutz, professor at the University of California, Berkely, said there could be “a black hole of liability.”
- Guyora Binder, a professor at the University of Buffalo, called the paper exciting but agreed that finding causal responsibility would be difficult.
“It’s a little reminiscent of the issues with tobacco and opioids where you have multiple manufacturers and you can’t trace which one contributed to which death…It’s not clear that if you remove any one of [the fossil fuel companies], that the deaths resulting from global warming don’t occur.”
- The paper's authors included a recommended sentence — restructuring the firms as public benefit corporations. This sentence would rapidly decrease fossil fuel production to reduce further damages from climate change while ramping up investments in clean energy and protecting vulnerable communities.
Do you think major oil companies should be charged with homicide?
-Jamie Epstein
The Latest
-
IT: Battles between students and police intensify, and... 💻 Should we regulate AI access to our private data?Welcome to Thursday, May 2nd, listeners... The battle between protesters and police intensifies on college campuses across the read more... -
Should U.S. Implement Laws Protecting Private Data from AI Access?Artificial intelligence is rapidly integrating into our everyday lives, transforming the way we work, live, and interact with read more... Artificial Intelligence -
Protests Grow Nationwide as Students Demand Divestment From IsraelUpdated May 1, 2024, 11:00 a.m. EST The battle between protesters and police has intensified on college campuses across the read more... Advocacy -
IT: Rumors spread about ICC charging Israel with war crimes, and... Should states disqualify Trump?Welcome to Tuesday, April 30th, friends... Rumors spread that the International Criminal Court could issue arrest warrants for read more...
Climate & Consumption
Health & Hunger
Politics & Policy
Safety & Security
There have been documented leaks for big oil that they long ago knew of the pollution hazards of fossil fuels and their own scientists long ago predicted that the climate would drastically change due to global warming from CO2 emissions.
If big oil is not charged with hiomicide or negligent homicide, they should certainly be held financially accountable for the damages wrought by the increasing severity of climate change.
I cannot any meaningful difference between financial accountability levied on asbestos manufacturers or the tobacco industry - who knew the harm that their products created, but prioritized their profitability over meaningful actions to minimize the harm that they had caused. The only real difference in this case is the amount of funding that big-oil uses to buy political favor from our congresspeople.
Perhaps big oil should be held accountable to pay for the damages caused by the increased severity of storms, droughts and flooding - as well as the increasing severity of these events as the rate of climate change is still increasing and will continue to increase for the near future.
Need a maybe for this one until we know more about the type of evidence available as the standard of proof is higher for a criminal murder case than it is for civil liability cases. Why don't they start out with civil liability cases instead? Start out charging companies causing toxic chemical spills into the air, ground, water like the recent rail accidents in Ohio and elsewhere, or the chemical company release of hazardous chemicals into the Delaware River?
"...the bar for conviction in a criminal case is higher than in civil litigation: A criminal conviction requires convincing a jury of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt."
"Brightbill, now a partner at Winston & Strawn LLP, said oil companies could argue that their “fractional contribution” to greenhouse gases worldwide are “dwarfed by the increases in emissions we see out of China every couple months.”"
"in the case of criminal charges against an oil company after a disaster — would be left to “prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the storm was the result of climate change, as opposed to a mere natural event that, but for the emissions of the company, would not have occurred.”
"Arkush and Braman say homicide charges for environmental crimes are not unprecedented. DOJ prosecuted BP PLC after the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, leading to a $4 billion settlement — the largest ever in a criminal case — and the oil giant pleading guilty to 11 felony counts of manslaughter for workers who died on the rig."
"California prosecutors in 2019 charged Pacific Gas & Electric Co. with homicide for deaths related to the 2018 Camp wildfire that killed 85 people. PG&E pleaded guilty to 84 felony counts of involuntary manslaughter for causing the blaze and was fined $4 million, the maximum penalty allowed."
"But Brightbill said that proving a causal connection to climate change would be difficult because of its diffuse nature, unlike an oil spill or a fire."
https://www.eenews.net/articles/climate-homicide-could-big-oil-be-sued-for-disaster-deaths/
Let's sue the food companies too for all the chemicals they put in our food and to the government for forcing farmers to GMO our natural foods...... Causes needs to stop fueling the fire!
I support charging any corporation for crimes that have affected large numbers of consumers, and oil companies are near the top of the list (along with gun manufacturers).
Oil companies have known for years that they were damaging the planet, and yet did nothing but amp up production, ask for tax breaks, and continue raping our planet so that now we're near a dire situation.
Charge them with anything we can; just make them pay.
Absolutely! They had bribed our politicians to gtet heir way with impunity for far, far too long and now they should have to pay the price!
This is a bit of a stretch as human choice is there. Charge them with pollution, here in Lousiana by causing land loss, amend over all by knowing the damage but doing nothing about it. They should also lose and subsidies as they make billions.
Big Oil, Big Safety. Little responsibility would go a long way. Enbridge, proud of that world record? Cleaned it up yet? Has to have crossed that 10 year mark by now. Maybe you wouldn't meet such resistance, if as a corporation, you tried to act like you actually gave a sh*t about the places you bully your way through. Food for thought.
They need to take follow guidelines and take accountability. Peoples lives aren't collateral damage for companies to make money.
Down with old fashioned fuel!
what they are doing
Damn right they should!
And why are we still subsidizing them and the big farm companies, et al.? Help the small farms survive. Subsidize them and the small businesses. Not those who make billions of dollars a year for themselves and their shareholders! They raise prices at their whim, not out of necessity!
Alaska's been sucking oil and mining's you know what for years. Every time a new industry tries to invest here, they shut it down. Mines, and oil are their Gods. They bow down to them daily. Their greed knows no bounds. Their lies are prolific. They steal so much from us our educational institutions are failing. Our people are starving and homeless, yet they do so little to solve the problem. Homes and rents are so high, in most places, that our children cannot afford to live here. After 49 years, I have had enough.
In spite of them, Alaska is still a beautiful place to visit, but you don't want to live here anymore!
murder is murder and no one should get away with it as we are all equal and have the same exact rights and should be treated equally
Murder, and property damage under various laws for the destruction of communities, coastal resources, ocean life with commercial and ecological value... there is a LONG list of potential charges that should be brought for consideration.
This is the most agregious and asinine argument yet. The elimination of fossil fuels will kill hundreds of millions if not billions of people. Fossil fuels have allowed the human population to grow as much as it has and allows us to sustain a larger amount of people. This allows us to have an enriched lifestyle with communication with and education from other nations, cultures, and people. Eradicating fossil fuels will cause mass death. Climate change has saved lives in that the warmer climates allows less people to die of the cold. More people would die if fossil fuels are abolished than if they remain. Stop mass death and support energy. Fossil fuels are here to stay.
The article or approach outlined does not meet the "without a reasonable doubt standard". You will need a specific victim without extenuating circumstances.
This is a waste of prosecutorial power unless they only seek headlines without substance.
Just when you think you've heard it all. Next we'll be holding spoon and fork companies responsible for making people fat.
Sure I would support that but you will never see that happen. They, those companies, have all the money and power and they will continue to kill us and our waters and our people. None of our reps are brave enough to stop it anymore. Sad
You bet I do. Along with poisioning our water, the Enbridge Oil Company of Canada will destroy the tourism of Northern Michigan because of their oil spill. THOSE SPILLS STINK! AND THEY Will DESTROY THE LOCAL COMMUNITIES OF ST. IGNACE AND MACKINAW CITY and their tourism, all Indian fishing deals made by false government treatys to begin with, and all their little shops, resturants, large hotels etc. etc. that exist for tourism. Add it up folks, it is worth billions and you know it! The Canadians can't even buy insurance against an oil spill so who do you think will be stuck?????? This crap makes me so mad, it has gone on for years and no one, Not ONE OF our reps or governors have put a stop to it!
The Canadian oil Company called Enbridge has been respondsible for numerours known oil spills from their 70 year old, rusting, aged pipleline beneth the Mackinaw Bridge in the Straits of Mackinaw in the Great Lakes of Michigan, though there are probably more. They refuse to stop. They say that now they will build a tunnel to bury underneath the the Straits, on top of an Indian Burial Ground which violates NAGPRA, (the Native American Graves and Reparations Act signed by both old Bush and young Bush) and here is the killer diller; in their tunnel they will move OIL,GAS, ELECTRICITY AND PROPANE! Who in their right mind would allow this? Type in your search, "Pictures of the Straits of Mackinaw". "God's Country some call it".
Oil Companies provide a product we need. Nobody wants to go back to the time of horse drawn wagons and subsistence agriculture. We need them and their products.
Homicide? No! "Willfull neglect?" YES! And since the U.S. government didn't do anything to prevent this problem, they should be charged as well. Especially those who didn't do anything about it since it was proven, because of the love of money and control. Just goes to show how greed can destroy everything. Just because you can afford it doesn't make it right. Privilege is not an accepteable commodity to be hoarded. I have no respect for those who neglect the less fortunate because they may have to take a cut in profits. Capitalism must be regulated and held responsible for the damages they have neglected throughput the decades. Time to make them EARN their living like the rest of us have to do. Not only our politicians but the entire fosil fuel industry.
Guilty as charged with the pollution of people.
Anyone in favor of such charges are out of their minds!
Can you imagine life without oil?
We'd be cooking, keeping warm and living at night in near darkness.
Let's talk about how many lives have been saved or prolonged/extended from the use of oil
There was a time when we killed hundreds of thousands of whales to use whale oil in lanterns to light our homes and offices at night.
A man would spend 6 months of his life every year cutting down trees and splitting wood for his fire place to cook and keep warm.
Coal was one step in advancement and gas and oil heat saved hundreds of lives each year ever since.
How, you ask?
Those who had to cook and hear 6 they're homes with hearths, would die at early age from smoke inhalation and fires in their homes.
I think you all better make sure you've got a roll of toilet paper with you before you take a shit.
Too many of you people are dumbed down through a lack of education and no common sense.
When did we stop holding anyone accountable? Enough! You do wrong, you injure others, you pay the consequences.
They kill even more than the gun companies.
Fossil fuel corporations and their top executives should be charged with homicide and ecocide too. If fossil fuel corporations are people, they should be treated like people accused of crimes against humanity and the ecosystems that sustain our lives. Executives can face life in prison, government seizure of assets, dissolution of corporations, and/or fines of BILLIONS of dollars. Said fines can be spent on restoring ecosystems, fully funding public education, converting fossil fuel systems to sustainable energy, etc.