Introduction
Environmental litigation has become one of the most dynamic and impactful areas of law in the United States. As climate change, industrial pollution, and corporate negligence continue to harm ecosystems and communities, the courts have emerged as critical battlegrounds for accountability.
In 2025, environmental litigation is no longer just about oil spills or hazardous waste — it’s about corporate climate responsibility, greenwashing, PFAS contamination, and the rights of future generations. From federal agencies tightening enforcement to citizens bringing class-action lawsuits, holding polluters accountable has evolved into a high-stakes global issue.
This article explores the latest developments, landmark cases, and strategies shaping environmental litigation in the U.S. — and how attorneys, regulators, and activists are redefining what justice looks like for the planet.
1. The Expanding Scope of Environmental Litigation
1.1 From Pollution to Climate Accountability
Traditional environmental lawsuits targeted clear sources of harm — such as illegal dumping, toxic emissions, or water contamination. Today, the scope is broader. Plaintiffs are increasingly suing not only for direct pollution but also for climate-related damages, such as rising sea levels, extreme weather, and wildfires linked to corporate emissions.
Oil and gas companies, chemical manufacturers, and even financial institutions are facing lawsuits accusing them of contributing to climate change through their investments or misleading environmental claims.
1.2 New Frontiers: PFAS, Plastics, and Microtoxins
The so-called “forever chemicals” — PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances) — are driving a new wave of litigation. These substances, used in everything from firefighting foam to cookware, persist in the environment and have been linked to cancer and organ damage.
Similarly, lawsuits over plastic pollution, microplastics in water supplies, and industrial runoff are increasing. Plaintiffs argue that corporations failed to warn consumers or take reasonable steps to mitigate environmental harm.
1.3 Environmental Justice
The concept of environmental justice (EJ) is now central to litigation. Attorneys and advocacy groups are representing communities — often low-income or minority neighborhoods — disproportionately affected by pollution. The Biden administration’s “Justice40” initiative and EPA’s focus on EJ enforcement have further empowered these claims.
2. Key Legal Frameworks and Agencies
2.1 Federal Environmental Laws
Several cornerstone laws underpin environmental litigation in the U.S.:
- Clean Air Act (CAA) – Regulates air emissions from stationary and mobile sources.
- Clean Water Act (CWA) – Prohibits discharge of pollutants into navigable waters without a permit.
- Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) – Known as “Superfund,” this law governs cleanup of hazardous waste sites.
- Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) – Controls hazardous waste generation, transportation, and disposal.
- National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) – Requires environmental impact assessments for major federal projects.
2.2 The Role of the EPA
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) remains at the forefront of enforcement. Under the 2025 agenda, the EPA has strengthened penalties for corporate violators, focused on PFAS regulation, and expanded monitoring of greenhouse gas emissions.
However, limited resources and political polarization sometimes shift the burden of enforcement to state agencies and private citizens, who can file lawsuits under “citizen suit” provisions.
3. Recent Trends in Environmental Litigation
3.1 Climate Change Lawsuits
In 2025, climate litigation has surged. Cities and states are suing fossil fuel giants such as ExxonMobil, Shell, and Chevron for deceptive practices — alleging they misled the public about the risks of climate change.
Several cases also seek compensation for infrastructure damage caused by climate impacts. For example, municipalities in California and New York are pursuing claims that oil companies should pay for the cost of rising sea levels and wildfire prevention.
3.2 Greenwashing and Consumer Fraud
Another major trend is the rise of greenwashing lawsuits, where companies are accused of misleading consumers about their environmental sustainability. Claims target misleading “carbon neutral” or “eco-friendly” labels that cannot be scientifically verified.
Under the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) Green Guides, false or unsubstantiated environmental marketing claims can constitute deceptive advertising. This area is rapidly expanding, with both class actions and regulatory enforcement actions increasing in 2025.
3.3 PFAS and Toxic Torts
PFAS litigation is reshaping toxic tort law. Thousands of lawsuits have been consolidated in multidistrict litigation (MDL) against chemical manufacturers like 3M and DuPont. Settlements worth billions have already been reached, and litigation now extends to downstream users, such as airports, municipalities, and even product manufacturers.
Attorneys are leveraging new science linking PFAS exposure to health issues — from thyroid disease to reproductive harm — to establish corporate liability.
4. Landmark Cases Defining 2025
4.1 State of Minnesota v. ExxonMobil (2025)
Minnesota’s lawsuit against ExxonMobil and Koch Industries accuses them of a decades-long campaign to deceive the public about climate risks. The case represents a shift toward fraud-based climate litigation, arguing that deception itself caused environmental and economic harm.
4.2 In re AFFF Products Liability Litigation
This multidistrict litigation involving aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF) — a PFAS-containing firefighting foam — has become one of the largest environmental cases in U.S. history. In 2023–2025, major settlements have been reached, with billions set aside for cleanup and water treatment.
4.3 Held v. Montana (2023–2025 Developments)
In this groundbreaking youth-led case, a Montana court ruled that the state’s failure to consider climate change in energy policies violated the constitutional right to a “clean and healthful environment.” The case inspired similar youth lawsuits across the country, emphasizing intergenerational environmental rights.
5. The Role of Technology and Data in Environmental Litigation
Technology is transforming how attorneys build and argue environmental cases.
5.1 Satellite Data and Remote Sensing
Law firms now use satellite imagery, drones, and GIS mapping to prove contamination, monitor deforestation, and track illegal discharges. These digital tools provide visual, real-time evidence admissible in court.
5.2 Big Data and Predictive Modeling
Advanced analytics allow attorneys to model pollution dispersion, estimate long-term health impacts, and quantify climate damage. Predictive models strengthen causation arguments — historically one of the toughest hurdles in environmental litigation.
5.3 AI and Legal Research
Artificial intelligence assists in reviewing vast document collections from discovery, identifying key evidence faster. AI-powered environmental monitoring also helps regulators detect violations before they escalate.
6. Corporate Accountability and ESG Litigation
Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) standards have become a legal minefield. Investors and consumers increasingly demand transparency, while plaintiffs are suing corporations for greenwashing, false sustainability claims, or failure to disclose environmental risks in financial filings.
The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) now requires enhanced climate-related disclosures for public companies. Attorneys expect an uptick in shareholder derivative lawsuits alleging that boards failed to manage environmental risks responsibly.
7. Challenges in Holding Polluters Accountable
7.1 Causation and Proof
Environmental harm is often diffuse and cumulative. Establishing a direct link between a defendant’s actions and a specific environmental injury can be scientifically and legally complex.
7.2 Regulatory Capture and Political Influence
Industry lobbying sometimes weakens environmental regulations or slows enforcement. Attorneys must often navigate a patchwork of state and federal jurisdictions to hold polluters accountable.
7.3 Lengthy Litigation and Resource Gaps
Environmental cases can span decades and require expert witnesses, environmental testing, and extensive discovery — making them costly. Smaller communities and NGOs often struggle to fund long-term litigation.
8. Citizen Suits and Grassroots Activism
The rise of citizen suits — where individuals or organizations sue polluters or government agencies for failing to enforce environmental laws — has become a key driver of accountability.
Activist organizations such as the Sierra Club, Earthjustice, and Center for Biological Diversity are playing vital roles in pressing for change through litigation.
Grassroots movements, often led by Indigenous and frontline communities, are also reshaping the environmental justice narrative — pushing for stronger protections for sacred lands, water rights, and clean air.
9. The Role of Attorneys in Environmental Advocacy
Environmental lawyers today must combine legal expertise with science, technology, and advocacy. Their work spans several functions:
- Litigators – Fighting corporations and government agencies in court.
- Policy Advisors – Helping draft and refine environmental legislation.
- Corporate Counsel – Advising companies on compliance, risk mitigation, and ESG reporting.
- Public Interest Lawyers – Representing affected communities and nonprofits.
Successful environmental litigators often collaborate with scientists, economists, and public health experts to build robust, evidence-based cases.
10. The Global Dimension
Although this article focuses on the U.S., environmental litigation has global implications. Courts worldwide — from Australia to the Netherlands — are holding governments and corporations accountable for climate inaction.
In 2024, the European Court of Human Rights recognized that states have a duty to protect citizens from climate change, reinforcing a legal precedent that could influence U.S. jurisprudence.
Multinational corporations now face transnational litigation risks, as plaintiffs increasingly coordinate across jurisdictions.
11. Emerging Legal Theories and Future Outlook
11.1 Rights of Nature
Some jurisdictions are recognizing the legal “personhood” of rivers, forests, and ecosystems, allowing lawsuits on behalf of nature itself. This concept is slowly gaining traction in U.S. courts, inspired by Indigenous legal traditions.
11.2 Climate Attribution Science
As climate science improves, plaintiffs can better demonstrate that specific events — like hurricanes or droughts — are exacerbated by greenhouse gas emissions. This strengthens liability arguments against major emitters.
11.3 Environmental Crimes and Corporate Manslaughter
There is growing momentum to criminalize severe environmental negligence. The “ecocide” movement seeks to establish environmental destruction as an international crime, similar to war crimes or crimes against humanity.
12. Balancing Economic Growth and Environmental Protection
Businesses argue that excessive litigation stifles innovation and economic development. However, the counterpoint is clear: unchecked pollution carries social and financial costs far greater than compliance.
Forward-thinking companies are investing in sustainable technologies, carbon capture, and clean energy transitions — not just to avoid lawsuits, but to stay competitive in a greener economy.
Conclusion
Environmental litigation in 2025 reflects a profound shift in how society defines accountability. What began as local fights against pollution has evolved into a global movement demanding transparency, justice, and sustainability.
Attorneys, regulators, and citizens are increasingly united by a shared goal: ensuring that those who profit from exploiting natural resources bear responsibility for the damage they cause.
As technology advances and climate impacts intensify, environmental litigation will only become more central to law, policy, and business. In this new era, the courtroom is as much a tool for environmental protection as the protest line or the policy table.