On Thursday, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled that courts must evaluate claims of excessive police force by considering the totality of the circumstances, rather than focusing solely on the moment an officer fears for their safety. The case stemmed from the 2016 death of Ashtian Barnes, who was fatally shot by Officer Roberto Felix Jr. during a Texas traffic stop. The officer claimed Barnes’ car began moving, prompting him to fire from the door sill. The justices rejected the “moment of the threat” doctrine, with Justice Elena Kagan writing that courts must consider all events leading to the use of force.

In a separate matter, the Court declined to hear challenges brought by energy companies and industry groups against state and local climate lawsuits. These suits seek to hold oil companies financially liable for climate-related damage. Critics argue that these cases aim to enforce anti-fossil fuel policies through the courts rather than legislation, potentially costing companies billions. O.H. Skinner of the Alliance for Consumers warned that these legal actions could ultimately hurt consumers and bypass democratic processes, effectively implementing climate policies akin to the Green New Deal. The Supreme Court’s refusal allows the lawsuits to proceed in state courts. Legal experts, including the American Enterprise Institute’s Adam White, cautioned that this could lead to a surge in litigation by environmental groups. The Biden administration supported allowing the cases to advance before the Court intervenes.