Iowa AG Leads Brief Against California Climate Reporting Laws

Our Driftless region deserves more than postcards — it deserves a watchdog. Be that support. Iowa Attorney General Brenna Bird and attorneys general from 24 additional states are urging the U.S. Supreme Court to issue a stay on California emissions reporting laws. The states allege, in the amici curiae filed, the California laws would impose an "illegal greenhouse gas disclosure policy" and would cause "nightmarish compliance costs and liability on companies across the country." In 2023, California enacted laws that require businesses of a certain size to submit greenhouse gas emissions reports and reports on the measures the business planned to adopt to reduce their climate-related financial risk. The brief from the states said California is "trying to be the national regulator of American greenhouse gas emissions—but for many reasons it may not do so." The State of Iowa and several other states that also signed onto Bird's brief, have already sued the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission over a similar law that sought to impose emissions reporting standards. That case is still being litigated, but the attorneys general allege the California law seeks to step in and do the same thing the states objected to at the federal level. The brief said the California law, which would impact businesses outside of the state with revenues above a certain level, requires businesses to express a "certain viewpoint on the highly controversial issue area of climate change." It said even if a business believes the climate-related "doomsday scenarios" are unlikely, it has to submit reports about how it plans to respond to the effects of a changing climate. The brief alleges the California laws are illegal because they compel speech from these companies on a topic they may want to avoid speaking on. It also alleges the laws would impose "irreparable economic harm on other states." The brief estimates out-of-state businesses would incur "millions" in auditing and reporting costs for emissions that are outside of California's borders. Businesses with more than $1 billion in annual revenue that do business in California are required by the law to disclose "comprehensive greenhouse gas emissions" along their supply chains. Business with $500 million in annual revenue that do business in the state will have to supply biennial climate-related financial risk reports that are publicly available. California's enacted Senate Bill 261 says climate change is affecting California communities and economy with wildfires, sea level rise, extreme droughts and extreme weather events. "Failure of economic actors to adequately plan for and adapt to climate-related risks to their businesses and to the economy will result in significant harm to California," the law reads. According to the California statute, mandatory disclosures set by law will help to "ensure a sustainable, resilient, and prosperous future" for the state. Bird said in a news release Monday about the amici curiae that "California needs to stay in California." "California has no right to tell Iowa or any other state what to do," Bird said in the release. "Their attempt to continually tell other states and businesses how to do business outside California is radical overreach and needs to be stopped." Pam Mackey-Taylor, Sierra Club Iowa Chapter's director, said in a statement that Iowa families are "suffering the real consequences of corporations burning fossil fuels for profit" and cited derechos, droughts and rising insurance costs as an example. "Climate change is real, and consumers should be able to make informed decisions about whether they prefer supporting companies that are reducing greenhouse gas emissions versus those that are not," Mackey-Taylor said. "Here in Iowa, we expect our attorney general to serve as the lawyer of the people and take up the everyday issues that affect Iowans, not fight the policies that help protect us." The attorneys' brief is in support of the Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America's suit against the chair of the California Air Resources Board. The parties involved requested, Nov. 10, an emergency injunction prohibiting the enforcement of the California laws, which are set to go into effect Jan. 1, 2026. Attorneys general from Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wyoming joined the brief from Bird.