ELR Citation: 56 ELR 20054
No(s). 24-813 (U.S. Apr 17, 2026)

The U.S. Supreme Court, 8-0, held that the Fifth Circuit erred in concluding that a state court challenge to an oil and gas company's crude oil production during World War II was not "for or relating to" its performance of federal duties for purposes of the federal officer removal statute. Several Louisiana parishes had sued oil and gas companies under the State and Local Coastal Resources Management Act, arguing they lacked permits and that some uses were illegally commenced and therefore not covered by the Act's exemption for uses legally commenced before 1980. One company removed the suit to federal court, arguing the suit related to its contractual duties to refine crude oil into military avgas during the war. A district court disagreed and granted the parish's motion to remand to state court. The Fifth Circuit affirmed, agreeing the company had "acted under" a federal officer as a military contractor but concluding that the suit was not "for or relating to" those acts because the company's refining contract did not specify how to acquire crude oil. The Supreme Court held that the company plausibly alleged a close relationship between its challenged crude oil production and performance of its federal avgas refining duties, and thus satisfied the "relating to" requirement under the removal statute. It vacated and remanded for further proceedings. Thomas, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Roberts, C.J., and Sotomayor, Kagan, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett, JJ., joined. Jackson, J., filed an opinion concurring in the judgment. Alito, J., took no part in the decision of the case.