Authored by Owen Evans via The Epoch Times,
A federal judge dismissed an antitrust lawsuit in which Michigan accused four major oil companies of acting as a cartel to block renewable energy.
U.S. District Judge Jane Beckering in Grand Rapids on Tuesday rejected a lawsuit filed in January by Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel, a Democrat, against BP, Chevron, Exxon, Shell, and the American Petroleum Institute.
Nessel claimed they caused Michigan residents to suffer "artificially high home and transportation energy costs."
She said that defendants acted "as a cartel in an unlawful conspiracy in restraint of trade to forestall meaningful competition from renewable energy in order to maintain their dominance in the transportation energy market and primary energy markets in Michigan and nationally in order to reap windfall, and illegal, profits."
The complaint said that the defendants' conspiracy "restrained competition in the primary energy market by suppressing renewable alternatives like solar and wind power in favor of fossil fuels."
The judge said antitrust laws protect against none of the injuries for which Michigan sought a remedy, except for energy overcharges.
"The distance is too great between the alleged conspiracy and Michigan's and its residents' overcharges to find that the conspiracy proximately caused the overcharges," Beckering said.
Other judges have rejected similar climate lawsuits, including in Delaware, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Puerto Rico, and South Carolina.
A lawyer for Chevron previously called Michigan's lawsuit "baseless as demonstrated by multiple related court dismissals."
"Michigan's lawsuit was part of a coordinated campaign against an industry that is vital to everyday life and serves as the engine of America's economy," the American Petroleum Institute's SVP and general counsel Ryan Meyers told The Epoch Times by email. "Climate policy is a federal, not state, issue, and we are pleased with the court's decision."
The Justice Department (DOJ) had submitted a brief in support of the companies in the Michigan lawsuit.
"Michigan is attempting to impose liability for wholly out-of-state conduct related to global greenhouse gas emissions and regulate that conduct under state law," the department wrote.
"Federal law exclusively governs interstate air emissions, including remedies for global climate change."
It said that Michigan is attempting to use state law to "hold energy producers liable for a worldwide problem caused by indivisible greenhouse gas emissions, all because the problem has far downstream alleged effects in Michigan that are no different from, and may indeed be dwarfed by, alleged effects in other states or other parts of the world."
The Epoch Times has contacted Attorney General Dana Nessel's office to ask if the state will appeal.
The Epoch Times contacted BP, Chevron, Exxon, and Shell for comment but received no reply by publication time.
The Trump administration has also taken legal action against the Democratic-led states of Michigan, Hawaii, Vermont, and New York over their climate-related actions, alleging that they interfere with federal authority and the country's energy development, according to the DOJ.
The DOJ in May 2025 accused the four states of overreach through their climate laws and lawsuits.
"These burdensome and ideologically motivated laws and lawsuits threaten American energy independence and our country's economic and national security," then-Attorney General Pamela Bondi said in a statement at the time.
"The Department of Justice is working to 'Unleash American Energy' by stopping these illegitimate impediments to the production of affordable, reliable energy that Americans deserve."
The lawsuits against the four states followed President Donald Trump's April 2025 executive order designed to protect American energy from state overreach, which stated that the nation's energy independence is threatened when state and local governments seek to regulate energy beyond their statutory authorities.
In 2023, California Attorney General Rob Bonta, backed by Newsom, sued California's biggest oil producers for "climate change-related harms," including extreme drought, flooding, and wildfires. A judge paused the litigation in April this year as the Supreme Court takes up the companies' request to quash similar lawsuits.
* * *
Tyler Durden Thu, 09/24/2026 - 09:30Paramount is weighing whether to bring Elon Musk on as an equity investor in its takeover of Warner Bros. Discovery, according to a report from Semafor. David Ellison has been sizing up potential investors as he works to lock down financing before the merger closes. Paramount has not said how much money it hopes to raise, and the size of any Musk investment remains undetermined. A Paramount spokesperson declined to comment, and Musk did not respond to a request for comment.
The news prompted panic inside CNN, which is owned by Warner Bros. Discovery. Staffers at the network had plenty to worry about before Musk's name entered the conversation. Layoffs loom over the newsroom, nobody knows who will run the place once Ellison takes the keys, and now the man who took a chainsaw to Twitter's payroll might own a slice of the operation.
"Amazing it comes out now of course," one CNN source said, pointing to the awkward timing for California Gov. Gavin Newsom, who threw his support behind the merger to keep Paramount jobs in his state. "Not good for Gavin!"
"When it rains...[it pours]," another source said. "It's really scary given what he did at X and DOGE."
At CBS News, David Ellison installed Bari Weiss as editor-in-chief after Skydance acquired Paramount, and she has drawn fierce criticism for firing longtime 60 Minutes correspondents and for how she manages the newsroom's coverage. CNN staffers have watched that saga unfold, and they have taken notes.
Once the merger is complete, David Ellison will control HBO Max, Paramount+, HBO, CBS, CNN, and thousands of film titles. That makes him one of the most powerful figures in American entertainment, and it makes who backs him financially a matter of real consequence.
Larry Ellison, David's father and the founder of Oracle, has personally guaranteed more than $40 billion of the equity financing that makes the acquisition possible. But an investment from Musk would still carry significance.
"An investment from Musk would be a significant vote of confidence in the combined Paramount Warner Bros. from a businessman who also has a devoted retail investor following," explained Semafor business reporter Rohan Goswami. "A check from Musk or other big financial backers would also give Paramount a more diversified investor base, and reduce Larry Ellison's financial burden."
The relationship between the two men runs deep in both directions. Larry Ellison invested in Tesla in 2018 and sat on its board for several years. When Musk took Twitter private in 2022, Ellison invested $1 billion in the deal.
"Musk's dollars and political influence were concerning to Democrats during the 2024 election, given his control of X," writes Goswami. "The possibility of him having even partial ownership in CNN and CBS would likely raise alarm bells in Washington, even though it is unlikely Musk would have formal input over the company's operations."
The news of Musk's potential involvement comes days after the $110 billion merger cleared its final hurdle. Paramount settled the antitrust lawsuit that California Attorney General Rob Bonta brought against the deal.
Paramount agreed to spend an additional $1.5 billion on domestic production over five years. The company must release 30 films in theaters every year, rising to 32 after the first two years, with at least 20 wide releases, rising to 21, and four independent films each year. If Paramount misses any of those targets, it must sell Miramax Studios and pay $30 million for every film it comes up short. The settlement also forces Paramount to negotiate cable deals separately and commits it to raising domestic production from 5% of all films to 20%, or even 30%, if Congress passes certain tax credits. The settlement also created a News Editorial Independence Board for CBS News and CNN, though nobody has spelled out what powers it will hold. The agreement said nothing about layoffs.
Still, for a newsroom that has spent years telling viewers to fear Elon Musk, the prospect of him buying in carries a certain poetry.
Tyler Durden Thu, 09/24/2026 - 09:15