Exxon files defamation lawsuit against Calif. AG, alleging smears after green hydrogen failure

ExxonMobil is continuing to push back against activists who have long demonized the company as "deceiving the public" about the impacts of fossil fuels. On Monday, Exxon filed a defamation lawsuit against in the Federal District of Eastern Texas against California Attorney General Rob Bonta and several environmental groups, including the Sierra Club. 

The lawsuit alleges that Bonta and the activists groups coordinated a campaign to defame Exxon over its promotion of advanced plastics recycling, while acting in the interest of an Australian company hoping to produce renewable-produced hydrogen and compete with Exxon in the energy market. 

The suit states that "In a staggering reversal and in a coordinated effort, Mr. Bonta, the Sierra Club, and a collection of erstwhile recycling enthusiasts are now attacking a Texas corporation for its advanced recycling operations—operations that are part of the solution to plastic waste, not the problem.  Instead of coming alongside efforts to support a developing technology and an emerging business model designed to recycle otherwise difficult-to-recycle plastics [...] the Defendants are repeatedly and publicly attacking ExxonMobil with false accusations of being a 'liar' and declarations that advanced recycling is a 'myth' and a 'sham.'”   

Activist campaigns

Exxon has long been a target of campaigns by anti-fossil fuel activists claiming the company has deceived the public about climate change, a charge that critics say is false. Most recently California Attorney General Rob Bonta filed a lawsuit against Exxon over its efforts to recycle plastics, accusing the company of “deceptive statements” about the viability of plastics recycling. 

Steve Milloy, senior legal fellow with the Energy and Environmental Legal Institute and publisher of “JunkScience.com,” told Just the News that Exxon’s defamation lawsuit is a great step, but responses against these campaigns should have happened sooner. 

"Nastier, nasty, nastier"

“Exxon could have sued these people ages ago and possibly avoided a lot of the pain they're going through now. But they always thought that they could be nice, play the game, slide by and get credit from the environmental groups. Of course, that never happened. They just got nastier, nasty, nastier,” Milloy said. 

According to the company’s lawsuit, while California promoted recycling policies throughout the state, it began attacking Exxon for its investments in and promotion of advanced recycling operations. 

“Why would Mr. Bonta or anyone who claims to be serious about cleaning up the environment and helping solve the plastic waste issue take such extreme measures to shut down the emerging and developing advanced recycling industry? The answer is foreign influence, personal ambition, and a murky source of financing rife with conflicting business interests,” the complaint alleges. 

The defendants named in the complaint all deny the allegations, claim it makes incorrect statements regarding their relationships, and argue that Exxon’s lawsuit is a retaliatory response to Bonta’s lawsuit. 

“This is another attempt from ExxonMobil to deflect attention from its own unlawful deception. The Attorney General is proud to advance his lawsuit against ExxonMobil and looks forward to vigorously litigating this case in court,” a spokesperson for the California Department of Justice told Just the News. 

Exxon’s complaint

Exxon is alleging that the Intergenerational Environment Justice Fund Ltd. (IEJF), an Australian charity owned by Minderoo Foundation, coordinated a campaign against Exxon when it refused to agree to a “levy” on virgin plastic. Minderoo isn’t named as a defendant in the complaint, but according to the lawsuit, it was founded and chaired by Andrew Forrest, a billionaire who founded Australian mining conglomerate Fortescue Metals Group. 

According to the complaint, Forrest wanted plastic resin manufacturers to jointly agree to artificially inflate the price of virgin plastic resin derived from petroleum through this self-imposed levy. This would make recycled plastic economically competitive with virgin plastic and encourage its use. Forrest approached Exxon in 2019 to get on board with the levy, but Exxon refused over concern that companies colluding to increase the cost of their product would violate U.S. antitrust laws. 

Forrest continued to push for the levy across the globe, while Minderoo began making “false and deceptive statements concerning ExxonMobil, plastics waste, and advanced recycling,” according to Exxon. 

Advanced recycling aims to turn plastic polymers back into their original molecules so they can be processed and used again as plastics or other products, such as jet fuel. According to an investigation by ProPublica, which is itself funded by anti-fossil fuel groups, advanced recycling produces 15% to 20% usable plastic materials, while the remaining material becomes fuel and other chemicals.

Marketplace failure

Around 2020, the complaint explains, Fortescue, which advocates for a transition away from fossil fuels, began pursuing a green hydrogen industry. Green hydrogen is hydrogen produced with water using renewable energy. By 2024, Fortescue’s initiative was failing, with layoffs and a lack of buyers for the product, a problem that is being seen throughout the entire nascent industry. 

“In the midst of these failures, Fortescue appears to have adopted a novel strategy for competing against American oil-and-gas producers like ExxonMobil. Having failed to successfully compete against ExxonMobil in the marketplace, Fortescue has, on information and belief, orchestrated a campaign to compete by turning the wheels of American justice to the company’s self-interested purposes,” the complaint states. 

The IEJF, the lawsuit alleges, retained U.S.-based Cotchett, Pitre & McCarthy to file a lawsuit against Exxon. Cotchett signed up environmental groups — including the Sierra Club, Heal the Bay and Baykeeper — to help with a media campaign related to the lawsuit, and the firm donated tens of thousands of dollars to Attorney General Bonta’s political campaigns. 

“Indeed, there can be no question that Cotchett, through its NGO lawsuit, and Bonta, through his lawsuit (both of which attack advanced recycling), are working together,” Exxon claims. 

The lawsuit details extensive investments that Exxon made in plastics recycling, much of it in response to California’s recycling mandates, only to be accused by Bonta and the other defendants named in the suit of lying about “sham solutions” to plastic waste problems. Bonta told Reuters in October, for example, that Exxon is “the largest producer of polymers and one of the biggest liars.” 

The lawsuit emphases that the defendants are entitled to disagree with Exxon’s policies and practices, and to debate the issues surrounding plastics waste. It also states that Bonta was entitled to file a lawsuit on behalf of the State of California. 

“This case does not challenge that conduct. Defendants are not entitled to engage in a false media campaign against ExxonMobil’s reputation and character nor engage in tortious interference. It is that conduct that is at issue in this lawsuit,” the complaint explains. 

Defendants deny allegations

Jonathon Berman, deputy chief of communications for the Sierra Club, told Just the News that Exxon is trying to bully those standing up to the company. “Exxon is clearly confused about the difference between defamation and accountability. This lawsuit is a shameless attempt at intimidation by a multibillion dollar polluter corporation that covered up its climate change denial for decades,” Berman said. 

Sejal Choksi-Chugh, Baykeeper executive director, also accused the company of using intimidation tactics. 

“Exxon’s retaliatory lawsuit is a transparent attempt by one of the world's largest corporations to intimidate those who hold it accountable for its actions and for misleading the public. Baykeeper stands up to bullies like Exxon who use their billions to distract and avoid accountability. We’ll continue to defend San Francisco Bay and everyone who lives in the Bay Area from single-use plastics that harm human health and pollute our planet,” Choksi-Chugh told Just the News.

A spokesperson for Minderoo said that Exxon’s complaint incorrectly describes the organization’s relationship with IEJF and its activities. 

“Minderoo Foundation is committed to reducing the production of plastics which have a devastating impact on human health,” the spokesperson said, adding that “Minderoo Foundation is a proudly Australian philanthropy, working to forge a fair future by courageously challenging inequalities and campaigning for meaningful change.” 

A spokesperson for Fortescue, which is not named as a defendant in Exxon's lawsuit, said in a statement to Just the News that it rejects the accusations Exxon is making in its complaint, including that it orchestrated Bonta's lawsuit against Exxon. 

"Fortescue remains fully committed to green hydrogen and the establishment of a global green hydrogen industry and rejects any claims to the contrary. As the costs come down, the green hydrogen market will come, and Fortescue will be ready," the company said. 

Forrest, the founder and executive chairman of Fortescue, said in a statement to Just the News that Exxon's lawsuit is part of the oil and gas industry's "playbook" and he's "deeply dedicated" to "steering the world" away from fossil fuel use. 

"I am personally delighted Exxon has walked themselves into the court and opened themselves up to cross-examination. The fossil fuel industry is getting increasingly desperate at maintaining its toxic grip on society. Their only priority is to maximise their profits and produce as much oil and gas as possible," Forrest said. 

It's not clear how the oil and gas industry, whose products are being consumed in record-high amounts every year, is desperate to maintain its market position, but Forrest insisted it's on "borrowed time." 

Heal the Bay declined to comment, but said it may offer comments at a later date. 

Lawfare funded by "dark money"

Exxon is one of many oil and gas producers who are the target of similar coordinated legal campaigns — often referred to as “lawfare” — which includes a deluge of climate lawsuits alleging the companies deceived the public about the impacts of climate change. The Rockefeller Family Fund, The Wall Street Journal reports, is funding more than 30 of these lawsuits, which is only one of the funders in what critics are saying is a network of dark money using courts to enact anti-fossil fuel policies without having to go through legislative processes. 

Exxon’s defamation suit follows other actions the company has taken against activists trying to force it to reduce or stop producing oil and gas.

The company pursued a lawsuit last year against anti-fossil fuel activist shareholders over their nuisance shareholder proposals. Despite a coordinated effort to get the company to withdraw the lawsuit, Exxon refused. Critics of the lawsuit, including California’s public pension plan CALPERS, failed in their bid to oust members of Exxon’s leadership over the controversy. A federal judge dismissed Exxon’s lawsuit in June.

A spokesperson for Exxon told Just the News that advanced plastic recycling technology works and can help address the plastic waste problem. The company stood by its defamation complaint. 

“This campaign of lies designed to derail our advanced recycling business must stop. We refuse to let others attack our reputation and technology for their financial and political gain. We’re investing in proven technology that one day may prevent more than one billion pounds of plastic waste from otherwise being burned or buried,” the spokesperson said.