Seventeen State Attorneys General Announce ExxonMobil Climate Fraud Investigations

On March 29, 2016, a coalition of 17 state attorneys general announced coordinated investigations into ExxonMobil for potential climate denial fraud at a daylong climate change conference in Manhattan. Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey and Virgin Islands Attorney General Claude Walker joined New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman, who had issued the first subpoena to ExxonMobil in November 2015. The unprecedented coalition from California, Connecticut, D.C., Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Virgin Islands, Virginia, Vermont, and Washington represented the largest coordinated state-level investigation of corporate climate fraud in American history.

Multi-State Investigation Scope

On April 19, 2016, Attorney General Healey issued a civil investigative demand to ExxonMobil seeking information regarding whether the company misled consumers and/or investors about the impact of fossil fuels on climate change and climate change-driven risks to Exxon’s business. The Massachusetts investigation examined potential violations of the state’s consumer protection statute. Schneiderman’s New York investigation used the state’s far-reaching securities and consumer protection statutes to examine whether Exxon deceived shareholders and the public about climate risks. The investigations sought documents about Exxon’s climate science research and internal communications spanning over four decades.

Legal Theories of Corporate Climate Fraud

The state investigations developed several legal theories: that Exxon defrauded investors by downplaying climate risks to its business; that the company violated consumer protection laws by misleading the public about climate science while knowing the truth; and that Exxon’s decades of funding climate denial while possessing contrary internal research constituted systematic fraud. The investigations built on the #ExxonKnew reporting from InsideClimate News and the Los Angeles Times, which provided documentary evidence that Exxon’s own scientists had confirmed human-caused climate change in the 1970s before the company funded decades of denial campaigns.

Political Backlash and Corporate Resistance

The coordinated state investigations triggered massive political backlash, with Republican members of Congress accusing the attorneys general of violating ExxonMobil’s First Amendment rights and engaging in a politically motivated “witch hunt.” ExxonMobil fought the investigations aggressively, filing countersuits and attempting to block subpoenas. Congressional Republicans escalated what they termed the “war over ExxonMobil and climate change” in July 2016, defending the company’s right to fund climate denial as protected speech. The company argued its climate disinformation campaigns constituted free speech rather than fraud, seeking to shield decades of deception behind First Amendment protections.

Significance

The 17-state coalition investigation represented the most serious governmental accountability effort against fossil fuel companies for climate deception, with attorneys general wielding subpoena power to access internal documents showing what Exxon knew and when. The investigations’ legal theories—treating climate denial as securities fraud and consumer protection violations—created potential pathways for holding companies accountable for funding disinformation about existential threats they knew to be real. However, the investigations faced sustained political opposition that would ultimately limit their effectiveness, foreshadowing how corporate wealth and political power would shield fossil fuel companies from accountability even when documentary evidence of decades of knowing deception emerged. The coordination among state AGs demonstrated that absent federal action, states could pursue accountability, though political headwinds and corporate legal strategies would make prosecution extremely difficult.