The U.S. Supreme Court has declined to delve into the intricate legal conundrum surrounding a Texas oil spill, leaving a contentious dispute unresolved and raising perplexing questions about liability under federal law.
Justices Won’t Review Texas Oil Spill Liability Fight : Legal Battle Unfolds
In a decisive move on Monday, the Supreme Court opted not to entertain the debate over whether a concoction of petroleum and chemicals qualifies as “oil” within the purview of federal oil spill legislation. The decision dealt a blow to companies embroiled in a prolonged legal tussle with a storage terminal operator accused of polluting the Houston Ship Channel.
The crux of the matter lies in the denial of a petition from Texas Aromatics LP and other entities, urging a review of a Fifth Circuit ruling that absolved Intercontinental Terminals Co. LLC from liability under the Oil Pollution Act. This Act shields the terminal operator from claims stemming from a 2019 hazardous spill, which inundated the channel with a noxious blend of oil and chemicals, closing it off to maritime traffic.
A Murky Definition
The companies, including Stolt Tankers BV and Petredec Trading, contend that the appellate panel erred in permitting Intercontinental to sidestep accountability for the spill. They argue that the mixture of oil and chemicals warrants action under federal laws governing environmental protection.
