Energy companies dodged a bullet with this lawsuit.

The Maryland Supreme Court Tuesday ruled against three local governments that filed lawsuits against energy producers, alleging they had suffered damages as a result of climate change. 

The ruling was another blow to what opponents are calling “climate litigation complex.” They say this well-funded campaign seeks to impose national anti-fossil fuel policies through the courts. It includes law firms that stand to profit handsomely from any settlements, as well as an effort to bias judges who may oversee the cases by providing them climate science training materials that are produced by activists and lawyers involved in climate litigation.  

“The Maryland Supreme Court got it right. Its ruling reflects the growing trend among state and federal courts that state law cannot govern interstate and international emissions, the global production and sale of energy or global climate change,” Phil Goldberg, special counsel for the Manufacturers’ Accountability Project, said in a statement. 

In today’s narrow 3-2 ruling , the court rejected legal actions brought by Baltimore, Annapolis, and Anne Arundel County. The majority ruling stated that state common law has never been extended to cover the type of conduct at issue—specifically, environmental damage resulting from worldwide greenhouse gas emissions.

The leftist, dark-money supported law firm Sher Edling failed in their efforts to destroy energy companies saving them from having to foot a massive liability and fight similar lawsuits that would have bankrupted the industry.

One other good outcome, is that Maryland’s high court joins Colorado and Hawaii who have also turned away identical lawsuits and such rulings will likely influence the US Supreme Court to rule against plaintiffs involved in similar litigation.