美国最高法院开启新审理期 首案审理能源巨头气候诉讼阻拦案US Supreme Court Opens New Term with Energy Giants' Bid to Dismiss Climate Suit
美国最高法院将于2026年10月5日（周一）上午10点开启新审理期，首场口头辩论将审理能源巨头阻拦地方气候损害诉讼案（森科尔能源诉博尔德县专员委员会案）。科罗拉多州博尔德市与县此前在州法院起诉埃克森美孚及森科尔能源，指控两家公司的化石燃料生产与误导性营销加剧了极端高温、野火等环境损害并索取赔偿。最高法院将审查联邦法律是否阻止地方政府在州法院依据州法提出此类索赔，并评估自身是否对科罗拉多州最高法院允许诉讼继续推进的裁决具有管辖权。大法官塞缪尔·阿利托已选择回避参与该案审理，使得本案由八位大法官作出裁决；若最终出现4比4平局，科罗拉多州最高法院支持博尔德的判决将维持有效。该起诉讼的裁决结果将直接牵动全美数十起同类气候责任索赔案件的走向。在接下来的审理期内，最高法院还将审理涉及枪支权利、移民政策以及选民身份验证等一系列关键宪法与行政权力争议。
The U.S. Supreme Court opens its new term on Monday, October 5, 2026, hearing oral arguments in a high-stakes dispute over whether local governments can pursue climate change lawsuits against fossil fuel companies in state courts. The opening case, Suncor Energy v. County Commissioners of Boulder County, stems from an action brought by the city and county of Boulder seeking monetary damages from Exxon Mobil and Suncor Energy over climate harms linked to fossil fuel production and alleged deceptive marketing. The justices are examining whether federal law bars such state-law claims and whether the court has jurisdiction to review a Colorado Supreme Court ruling that allowed Boulder's lawsuit to proceed. Justice Samuel Alito recused himself from the case, leaving eight justices to participate; an evenly divided 4-4 vote would keep the lower court's ruling in favor of Boulder in place. The outcome could shape the future of dozens of similar lawsuits filed by states and municipalities nationwide, as the court also prepares to hear major disputes over gun rights, immigration policies, and voter citizenship verification.
01新审理期开启：博尔德诉能源公司案打头阵New Term Begins: Boulder Climate Suit Opens Oral Arguments
美国最高法院首席大法官约翰·罗伯茨将于2026年10月5日上午10点正式召集公开庭审，标志着最高法院自6月下旬以来的首场重返法庭活动。在开幕当天安排的两场口头辩论中，首场审理的森科尔能源与埃克森美孚上诉案，直接源自科罗拉多州博尔德市与县于2018年提起的州级诉讼。该案是各州和地方政府在州法院起诉大型能源企业的数十起索赔案件之一，地方政府寻求让化石燃料生产商对过去及未来的气候损害承担金钱赔偿责任。
Chief Justice John Roberts will call the Supreme Court into public session at 10 a.m. on Monday, October 5, 2026, marking the justices' first return to the bench since late June. The opening argument on a two-case docket involves Suncor Energy and Exxon Mobil challenging a long-running lawsuit first filed in 2018 by the city and county of Boulder, Colorado. The litigation is among dozens of actions brought nationwide by state and municipal authorities in state courts, demanding monetary damages from energy companies for past and future climate harms attributed to atmospheric greenhouse gas accumulation.
在博尔德案中，地方官员依据州法提出了五项索赔主张，指控埃克森美孚以及在科罗拉多州运营两座炼油厂的森科尔能源进行无节制的化石燃料生产和误导性营销，导致大气中温室气体浓度激增，进而使当地面临极端高温、更大规模且更频繁的野火以及生态系统破坏。两家能源巨头此前曾试图将诉讼移送至联邦法院，但未能成功；随后向博尔德县地区法院申请基于联邦法排除州级诉求为由驳回起诉，遭到拒绝后向科罗拉多州最高法院上诉，最终被该州最高法院驳回并上诉至联邦最高法院。
Boulder officials brought five state-law claims against Exxon Mobil and Suncor Energy—which operates two refineries in Colorado—alleging that the companies' unchecked fossil fuel extraction and deceptive marketing contributed to greenhouse gas emissions that forced the area to confront extreme heat, larger and more frequent wildfires, and widespread ecosystem degradation. Exxon and Suncor initially sought unsuccessfully to move the dispute into federal court. After the Boulder County District Court rejected their motion to dismiss the lawsuit under federal preemption arguments, the energy companies appealed to the Colorado Supreme Court, which also ruled in Boulder's favor before the companies petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court.
02法律争点与诉讼双方的核心主张Legal Questions and Core Arguments of the Litigants
在呈交最高法院的诉状中，埃克森美孚与森科尔能源的律师团队主张，气候变化是由于所有州与国家排放的温室气体累积而成的复杂公共政策挑战，这些排放物无法被分离或追溯至个别来源。两家公司警告称，如果允许各州及地方诉讼继续推进并最终胜诉，将等同于对化石燃料生产商征收碳税并导致整个行业破产；若各州法院获准确立互不相同的规则，全美50个州及其地方政府将各自设立无数相互冲突的气候政策。
In Supreme Court filings, attorneys for Exxon Mobil and Suncor Energy argued that climate change represents a complex public-policy challenge resulting from cumulative greenhouse gases emitted across all states and nations, emissions that cannot be unmixed and traced to individual sources. The companies warned that permitting state-level lawsuits to proceed and succeed would effectively impose an indirect carbon tax on fossil-fuel producers and bankrupt the industry. They cautioned that upholding the state court's position would allow all 50 states and their municipalities to ask local courts to establish countless, conflicting climate policies across the nation.
博尔德方面在法律答辩中反驳指出，宪法赋予各州应对自身边界内所受损害的权力，至于是否应在联邦层面处理这些问题，决定权在国会而非通过司法干预予以剥夺。博尔德官员强调，该起诉讼并非试图解决全球气候变化问题，而是要求两家能源巨头就其侵权行为分担博尔德承受的部分本地成本；地方官员同时指出，能源巨头过早向联邦最高法院寻求介入，应当等待州法院作出最终判决后再行申请复审。
Lawyers for Boulder County countered that the Constitution permits states to address harms occurring within their own borders, noting that whether such matters should be handled federally is a decision resting with Congress. Boulder officials emphasized that the litigation is not an attempt to solve global climate change, but merely asks that the energy companies bear their fair share of local costs incurred partly because of their tortious conduct. The county also maintained that the energy companies rushed to the Supreme Court prematurely instead of waiting for a final judgment from state court.
03阿利托回避参与与4比4平局的潜在影响Alito's Recusal and the Potential for a 4-4 Split
最高法院上周宣布，大法官塞缪尔·阿利托已选择回避参与博尔德诉能源公司案的审理，法院在通知中并未披露其作出回避的具体原因。根据阿利托公布的2025年个人财务披露报告，他持有康菲石油（ConocoPhillips）以及菲利普斯66（Phillips 66）两家能源公司的个股股份，但并未申报持有埃克森美孚或森科尔能源的个人股票。由于阿利托缺席，最高法院九名大法官中仅有八位出席周一的口头辩论并参与后续评议。
The Supreme Court announced last week that Justice Samuel Alito chose to recuse himself from the Boulder climate lawsuit, providing no official explanation for his decision. According to his financial disclosure report for 2025, Alito reported individual stock holdings in two energy companies, ConocoPhillips and Phillips 66, while holding no reported shares in either Exxon Mobil or Suncor Energy. Alito's absence leaves only eight justices on the bench to hear oral arguments on Monday and decide the matter.
阿利托的回避使得该案可能出现4比4的平局表决结果。按照最高法院的法定审理程序，若大法官出现票数均等，科罗拉多州最高法院此前支持博尔德并允许诉讼继续进行的裁决将自动维持有效。威廉与玛丽法学院法律教授乔纳森·阿德勒对此分析指出，最高法院审理的核心在于各州是否有权在法庭上提出本地救济主张，博尔德即使在最高法院层面获得保留诉讼的裁决，也不意味着地方政府最终能在州法院审理中对化石燃料生产商胜诉，其后续能够索赔的具体范围仍可能面临大幅收窄。
The eight-member court opens the possibility of an evenly split 4-4 vote among the justices. Under high court procedural rules, such a tie would automatically leave the Colorado Supreme Court's ruling favoring Boulder in place, allowing the municipal lawsuit to move forward in state court. William & Mary law professor Jonathan Adler, who filed a friend-of-the-court brief supporting Boulder, noted that the Supreme Court's review addresses whether plaintiffs get to present their claims rather than guaranteeing their ultimate victory against fossil-fuel producers, adding that the scope of what Boulder can pursue could be narrowed considerably as the case proceeds.
04更广泛的审理期议程与法院面临的制度压力Broader Term Docket and Institutional Pressures
除了首日审理的气候损害赔偿诉讼外，最高法院在新审理期内还将处理多项涉及行政权力与宪法权利的重大争议。待决案件涵盖枪支权利、宗教自由以及选民身份核查规则等。涉及第二任期议程的行政权力争议也排入日程，包括移民政策、联邦官僚机构改革，以及白宫宴会厅和肯尼迪中心建设项目可能引发的诉讼。在上一审理期中，特朗普政府在互惠关税、出生公民权以及罢免美联储理事等案中受挫，但在多项移民政策、选区重新划分以及竞选支出争议中获胜。
Beyond the opening climate damage lawsuit, the Supreme Court's upcoming term features high-profile disputes over constitutional rights and executive authority. The justices are set to examine cases touching on the Second Amendment, religious liberty, and voter citizenship verification requirements. Additional battles over President Donald Trump's second-term agenda include fights over immigration policies, federal bureaucracy reforms, and potential litigation concerning construction projects at the White House ballroom and the Kennedy Center. During the previous term, the administration lost challenges over reciprocal tariffs, birthright citizenship, and the removal of Federal Reserve governors, while prevailing on certain immigration measures, mid-decade redistricting, and federal campaign spending.
法院在新审理期开幕时面临创纪录的低公众支持率以及两党日趋激烈的政治审查。自2025年以来，特朗普司法部在最高法院的紧急上诉申请中胜率超过70%，涵盖中期选举前核实选民公民身份的新联邦规则等临时执行许可。保守派人士要求弹劾阻碍白宫政策的联邦法官，民主党方面则重申改革最高法院结构的诉求。前司法部高级官员托马斯·杜普雷指出，首席大法官罗伯茨作为制度派与传统主义者，在各项制度与传统承受重压的时期，正努力坚守长期治理华盛顿的制度规范。
The court opens its session confronting record-low public approval ratings alongside heightened bipartisan scrutiny. The Trump Justice Department has prevailed in over 70 percent of its emergency applications before the court since 2025, securing temporary enforcement greenlights on issues such as voter citizenship verification rules ahead of the midterms. These dynamics have prompted right-wing demands to impeach federal judges who block administration policies, while Democrats have renewed calls for sweeping court restructuring. Appellate attorney and former Justice Department official Thomas Dupree observed that Chief Justice John Roberts is seeking to uphold institutional norms and traditions at a moment when traditional institutions face historic pressure.
