News & Analysis
September 23, 2026
U.S. Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito must recuse from an upcoming climate deception lawsuit against Big Oil companies, a watchdog group says, after it was revealed that Alito was warned that a ruling in climate deception cases could adversely affect his financial investments in ConocoPhillips and Phillips 66.
The high court will hear Suncor v. Boulder this fall, in which the city and county of Boulder, Colorado aims to hold ExxonMobil and Suncor Energy accountable for concealing the climate harms of their fossil fuel products. It is one of dozens of similar cases brought against the fossil fuel industry by communities across the country.
After Justice Alito rebuffed calls to recuse from Suncor v. Boulder in the spring, new research from Consumer Watchdog shows that Alito was warned by the fossil fuel companies he is invested in that climate deception lawsuits similar to the one before the court “could adversely affect our business” (Phillips 66) and “financial condition, as well as the value of an investment in our common stock” (ConocoPhillips). Exxon and Suncor separately told the justices that their decision in Suncor v. Boulder could resolve “parallel suits across the country” that have been filed against Phillips and Conoco.
“As a shareholder, Alito has been warned that climate deception lawsuits pose financial risks to his investments. As a Supreme Court Justice, he has been told how Suncor v Boulder can prevent those lawsuits from advancing, removing the risk to his investments,” said Alexandra Nagy, Organizing Director of Consumer Watchdog.
In 2023, Exxon and Suncor told the justices that Boulder’s case was the “ideal vehicle” for the Supreme Court to address climate accountability cases broadly because it “involves a smaller set of defendants than those cases and is thus less likely to present recusal issues.” At the time, Alito recused from the case, as he has in many other climate deception suits. But now, Alito has changed course and currently plans to weigh in on whether or not Boulder’s case can continue toward discovery and trial — a ruling that could have major implications for similar climate accountability cases, including those that name ConcoPhillips and Phillips66 as defendants.
A coalition of watchdog groups called for Alito to recuse from Suncor earlier this year and urged the Senate Judiciary Committee to investigate whether Alito’s consideration of Boulder’s case was in violation of the court’s code of conduct. Months later, an analysis from Court Accountability revealed that Alito gained up to $2.9 million from his fossil fuel investments between 2005 and 2024.
The fossil fuel industry has made clear many times that any ruling in Suncor v. Boulder would have major consequences for such investments.
“The Court’s resolution of this case will have implications for the entire petroleum and natural-gas industry, including API’s members,” the American Petroleum Institute wrote in an amicus brief urging the justices to rule in favor of the oil companies. API’s members include ConocoPhillips and Phillips66.
While a Supreme Court spokesperson previously told NBC that “Justice Alito does not have a financial interest in any party” involved in the case, and thus was advised by the court’s legal counsel that “his recusal is not required,” Consumer Watchdog’s report also noted that the Supreme Court’s own recusal guidance indicates that the justice should recuse in Boulder’s case. The Code of Conduct, which all of the justices agreed to in 2023, states that a justice should recuse if “[t]he Justice knows that the Justice, individually or as a fiduciary, [...] has a financial interest in the subject matter in controversy or in a party to the proceeding, or any other interest that could be affected substantially by the outcome of the proceeding.”
Earlier this year, Alito recused just days before oral arguments from a case against oil and gas companies over damage to Louisiana's coastline because of his “financial interest in ConocoPhillips.”
“Justice Alito has a direct and documented financial stake in the outcome of Suncor v Boulder,” Nagy said. “Under the Supreme Court’s own Code of Conduct, Alito should recuse.”
