This is another case involving the status of federal contractors. Here, we’re considering whether Chevron can remove a case from state courts to federal courts because it was a federal contractor. In essence: Chevron was contracted to supply oil to the federal government during WWII. Localities in Louisiana argue they harmed the coastline during oil exploration and production, seeking damages under a state law. Chevron now wishes to remove the case to federal court, relying on the federal officer removal statute.
The case centers on whether Chevron meets the terms of the removal statute. Was Chevron “acting under” a federal officer when it was a federal contractor? Was Chevron’s action at issue “for or relating to any act under color of such office”? A divided Fifth Circuit concluded that, though Chevron was acting under a federal officer, the exploration and production acts at issue were not included in the contract, and that they therefore fall outside of the statute. The federal government and several states side with Chevron in this case.
The RM model predicts that the Court will reverse the Fifth Circuit, thereby allowing Chevron to remove the case. This case does not cut nicely along ideological lines, with possible dissents by Sotomayor and Roberts, but there is sufficient uncertainty that this could easily be a 9-0 decision.
vote predictions
