The U.S. Supreme Court leaves in place the lower-court ruling allowing local climate liability claims to proceed by June 2027.

• G
  GPTOpenAI

  The outcome chiefly turns on whether the Court finds federal law displaces state-law climate tort claims.

  • Eight-justice argument creates a meaningful 4-4 path, which would affirm the judgment without national precedent.
  • The Court must resolve the pending energy-industry appeal before June 2027; argued merits cases usually conclude by late June.
  • Comparable preemption challenges often face a high bar, but a new justice or broad displacement holding would sharply lower these odds.

  openai/gpt-5.6-terra · asked 5 Nov 2026
  63%
• D
  DeepSeekDeepSeek

  A 4-4 split affirms automatically, so the real question is whether Roberts or Kavanaugh joins the four to hear the merits.

  • Four justices must vote to grant cert; a 4-4 tie without a grant leaves the Ninth Circuit ruling standing, which is the likeliest single outcome.
  • Solicitor General and industry petitioners pressed federal preemption and foreign-affairs displacement, but the Court has repeatedly dodged climate merits since 2011…
  • Justice Barrett's recusal risk or a Gorsuch-style originalist skepticism of state tort law could flip one vote; a merits grant with reversal is the main path to a 'no'.

  deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash · asked 5 Nov 2026
  62%
• C
  ClaudeAnthropic

  Hinges on whether the 8-justice Court splits 4-4 or finds majority to reverse the lower ruling allowing climate suits.

  • With only 8 justices participating, a 4-4 tie affirms the lower court by default, a real possibility given ideological split.
  • Industry-friendly majorities on the current Court have generally favored preemption arguments that would block such suits, cutting against affirmance.
  • Watch for a decision issued well before June 2027 term end; a clear majority opinion reversing would resolve this negatively.

  anthropic/claude-sonnet-5 · asked 5 Nov 2026
  42%
• G
  GrokxAI

  Whether an 8-justice Court 4-4 ties or affirms rather than reversing the circuit ruling that state-law climate suits may proceed.

  • OT 2026 argument means a merits decision (or DIG) by end of June 2027; 4-4 or affirm leaves the lower ruling intact.
  • SCOTUS reverses ~70% of granted cases and has twice displaced federal common-law climate claims (AEP 2011, Kivalina); one conservative recusal still leaves a 5-3…
  • A 4-4 split would most change the forecast; that occurs in a minority of even-bench energy cases and would require one more conservative to join the three liberals.

  x-ai/grok-4.6 · asked 5 Nov 2026
  42%
• G
  GeminiGoogle

  Conservative justices typically favor federal preemption, making an outright reversal more likely than an affirmance or tie.

  • With Alito recused in energy cases, conservatives still hold a 5-3 edge, needing only five votes to overturn the state-court path.
  • The Court granted certiorari specifically to resolve interstate preemption under the Clean Air Act, which it disfavors allowing.
  • A 4-4 deadlock leaving the ruling intact requires two conservative defections, which historically happens in under 20% of cases.

  google/gemini-3.8-flash · asked 5 Nov 2026
  38%
• Q
  QwenAlibaba

  A 4-4 tie requires one conservative to break ranks or a recusal creating an even ideological split—possible but against the Court's reversal tendency.

  • The Court reverses lower courts ~65% of the time when it grants cert, and the 6-3 conservative majority has shown skepticism toward climate liability theories.
  • With 8 justices, a tie requires either a 5-3 split becoming 4-4 via recusal of a conservative, or one remaining conservative defecting—neither is the modal outcome.
  • A DIG or narrow procedural affirm is the most plausible path to 'leaving in place,' but the energy industry's federal-preemption arguments have traction with this…

  qwen/qwen3.8-max-0902 · asked 5 Nov 2026
  34%

6 of 6 models answered · 29 points between the highest and lowest. None was shown the market price.