Case Explained: CITY OF CHICAGO v. BP P.L.C., et al

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit

Filed: 2026-07-15

The Seventh Circuit affirmed the district court’s order remanding the City of Chicago’s climate change damages lawsuit against fossil fuel companies back to state court, holding that the defendants failed to establish federal officer removal jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1442(a)(1). The court applied the Supreme Court’s standard from *Chevron USA Inc. v. Plaquemines Parish* (2026), which requires a “connection” between the suit and the defendant’s federal duties that is more than “tenuous, remote, or peripheral.” The court concluded that the defendants’ production of fossil fuels for the federal government—including military contracts from World War II through the Cold War and current management of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve—was too attenuated from Chicago’s specific claims. Chicago’s complaint alleged only that the defendants deceived consumers regarding climate impacts, leading to increased fuel usage and subsequent local harms; it expressly disclaimed any injuries arising from the defendants’ provision of specialized fuels to the federal government or on federal property. Because the alleged misrepresentations were directed at the general public rather than the federal government, and because an injunction against such advertising would not interfere with the defendants’ ability to fulfill their federal contracts, the suit did not “relate to” any act under color of federal office. As a result, the case remains in Illinois state court for further proceedings on Chicago’s state law claims regarding products liability, negligence, nuisance, and consumer fraud. The district court’s remand order stands, and the defendants’ attempt to keep the litigation in federal court was rejected.

Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.