A second federal court has now struck down New York State’s climate change Superfund law, which would have required fossil fuel companies to pay $75 billion to the state over 25 years to help New York address the purported effects of climate change.

On September 23, 2026, a second federal district court struck down New York’s Climate Change Superfund Act in a lawsuit brought by the United States and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The district court judge held that the Act is preempted both by the Clean Air Act and, independently, by the federal government’s exclusive authority over foreign affairs. The Court declared the Act unconstitutional and permanently enjoined New York officials from enforcing it.

Previously, on August 30, a federal court judge in upstate New York issued a similar ruling in a case brought by a coalition of states and industry associations, holding that the Act was preempted by federal law and enjoined its enforcement. 

The Act would have established a $75 billion climate-change adaptation cost-recovery program funded through assessments against certain fossil-fuel producers and refiners. It sought to impose strict liability based on greenhouse gas emissions attributed to fossil-fuel extraction and refining from 2000 through 2024, and liability based on each responsible party’s share of covered emissions. Additionally, the Act calculated liability using emissions associated with fossil-fuel extraction and refining worldwide, not merely emissions occurring in New York.

The courts also held that the EPA’s 2026 rescission of its GHG endangerment finding did not alter the preemption analysis. The opinion asserted that relevant question is whether federal law authorizes the state regime, not whether the EPA currently chooses to exercise its regulatory authority over GHG emissions.

Both decisions are likely to be appealed.