Chevron USA Inc. v. Plaquemines Parish · ¶80

The Fifth Circuit erred in concluding that the removal statute's “for or relating to” requirement was not met under the circumstances presented here. It faulted Chevron for failing to identify a specific contractual directive “pertaining to oil production.” Plaquemines Parish v. BP America Production Co., 103 F. 4th 324, 341 (2024). But Chevron's federal contracts can be a but-for cause of the challenged crude-oil production without specifically directing that production. Because the Fifth Circuit's contractual-directive demand goes a step further than even the causal-nexus test, I agree with the majority that the Fifth Circuit's judgment must be vacated.

preliminary print (page proof)
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.