Federal Officer Removal Statute Supreme Court Case (Chevron v. Plaquemines Parish)

Developing StoryLast updated APR 18
SUMMARY

The Supreme Court ruled 8-0 on April 17, 2026, that Chevron plausibly alleged a close relationship between its crude-oil production and federal aviation gas refining duties, satisfying the federal officer removal statute, allowing a lawsuit concerning damage to the Louisiana coast to be heard in federal court. As of April 17, 2026: The case has been vacated and remanded, with Justice Alito not participating in the ruling due to a financial conflict. This decision impacts the interpretation of the federal-officer removal statute, which determines whether cases against federal contractors can be moved from state to federal court. The case originated from a $744.6 million verdict against oil and gas companies in a Louisiana state court.

Timeline

Want updates on this thread?

Track this story

April 2026 — 1 developments

  1. The Supreme Court ruled 8-0 on April 17, 2026, that Chevron plausibly alleged a close relationship b…

    The Supreme Court ruled 8-0 on April 17, 2026, that Chevron plausibly alleged a close relationship between its crude-oil production and federal aviation gas refining duties, satisfying the federal officer removal statute. This decision allows the lawsuit concerning damage to the Louisiana coast to be heard in federal court, vacating and remanding the case. Justice Alito did not participate in the ruling.

February 2026 — 1 developments

  1. The Supreme Court's decision in Chevron v.

    The Supreme Court's decision in Chevron v. Plaquemines Parish is expected to significantly impact federal contractor litigation by potentially broadening or restricting their ability to remove cases to federal court. The case, which stems from alleged ecological damage during World War II oil production, hinges on the interpretation of the federal-officer removal statute. A decision is anticipated soon, with implications for hundreds of millions of dollars in damages.

January 2026 — 9 developments

  1. Justice Samuel Alito recused himself from the Supreme Court case Chevron U.

    Justice Samuel Alito recused himself from the Supreme Court case Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Plaquemines Parish, Louisiana due to a financial interest in ConocoPhillips, a parent company of a party in the lower court case. His recusal means the case will be decided by the remaining eight justices.

  2. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce filed a coalition amicus brief urging the Supreme Court to enforce the …

    The U.S. Chamber of Commerce filed a coalition amicus brief urging the Supreme Court to enforce the 2011 amendment to the federal-officer removal statute.

  3. The Supreme Court is considering whether oil companies being sued in state court for oil production …

    The Supreme Court is considering whether oil companies being sued in state court for oil production during World War II can move the case to federal court based on federal contracts for wartime fuel. The case addresses whether a causal-nexus or but-for causation standard applies under the Federal Officer Removal Statute.

  4. A webinar was held on January 21, 2026, to discuss the oral arguments in *Chevron USA, Inc.

    A webinar was held on January 21, 2026, to discuss the oral arguments in *Chevron USA, Inc. v. Plaquemines Parish, Louisiana*, highlighting the hundreds of millions of dollars in damages at stake.

  5. The Supreme Court heard arguments in Chevron v.

    The Supreme Court heard arguments in Chevron v. Plaquemines Parish regarding the federal officer removal statute, specifically whether World War II-era federal contracts for aviation gas justify moving a coastal damage lawsuit to federal court. The Fifth Circuit previously rejected this argument, a decision the Washington Legal Foundation is urging the Supreme Court to overturn. The case involves a $744.6 million verdict against oil and gas companies.

  6. During oral arguments, justices considered the industry's argument that cases should be heard in fed…

    During oral arguments, justices considered the industry's argument that cases should be heard in federal court because companies provided petroleum products for World War II federal contracts. A state court had previously ruled Chevron had to pay $745 million to a Louisiana parish.

  7. The Supreme Court heard oral arguments on January 12, 2026, in Chevron USA Inc.

    The Supreme Court heard oral arguments on January 12, 2026, in Chevron USA Inc. v. Plaquemines Parish, Louisiana, a case examining the federal officer removal statute. The central question is whether historical crude oil production activities by companies with World War II-era contracts for refined aviation gasoline sufficiently relate to those contracts for removal purposes. The Fifth Circuit had previously ruled against removal.

  8. During the oral arguments, Chevron's counsel, Paul Clement, asserted that the 2011 amendment to the …

    During the oral arguments, Chevron's counsel, Paul Clement, asserted that the 2011 amendment to the Federal Officer Removal Act, which added the words 'related to,' was intended to have a broad meaning. He argued this interpretation applied to the refining of aviation fuel.

  9. The Supreme Court of the United States heard oral arguments in the case of Chevron USA Inc.

    The Supreme Court of the United States heard oral arguments in the case of Chevron USA Inc. v. Plaquemines Parish, Louisiana, during its October 2025-2026 term.

November 2025 — 1 developments

September 2025 — 2 developments

  1. The Atlantic Legal Foundation and Washington Legal Foundation filed a joint amicus brief urging the …

    The Atlantic Legal Foundation and Washington Legal Foundation filed a joint amicus brief urging the Supreme Court to reverse the Fifth Circuit's narrow interpretation of the federal-officer removal statute.

June 2025 — 2 developments

  1. The Supreme Court granted certiorari on June 16, 2025, in Chevron U.

    The Supreme Court granted certiorari on June 16, 2025, in Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Plaquemines Parish to review the scope of the federal officer removal statute. The case will determine if a federal contractor can remove litigation to federal court for activities performed under a World War II-era federal oil-refinement contract, focusing on the interpretation of the "relating to" standard in the 2011 amendment.

January 2025 — 1 developments

  1. Chevron USA Incorporated and other oil companies filed a petition for a writ of certiorari with the U.

    Chevron USA Incorporated and other oil companies filed a petition for a writ of certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court, seeking review of the Fifth Circuit's decision.

January 2024 — 1 developments

  1. After multiple attempts by the oil companies to remove the cases to federal court, the U.

    After multiple attempts by the oil companies to remove the cases to federal court, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed the district courts' decisions to remand the cases back to state court. The Fifth Circuit found that while Chevron's production of aviation fuel under federal contracts during World War II constituted 'acting under' a federal officer, the crude oil production activities were not sufficiently 'connected or associated with' that refining, as required by Fifth Circuit caselaw.

January 2013 — 1 developments

  1. Several Louisiana coastal parishes, including Plaquemines and Cameron, filed lawsuits in state court…

    Several Louisiana coastal parishes, including Plaquemines and Cameron, filed lawsuits in state court against a consortium of oil and gas companies, such as BP America Production Company, Chevron U.S.A. Inc., and Shell Oil Company. The parishes alleged violations of Louisiana's State and Local Coastal Resources Management Act of 1978 (SLCRMA) due to oil and gas exploration, production, and transportation without proper permits or in violation of permit conditions. The complaints also included pre-1980 activities, some dating back to World War II.