SEC Climate Disclosures Rules One Step Closer to the Grave; GHG Emissions Disclosures One Step Closer to Becoming a Multi-State Compliance Issue
The slow death of the Securities and Exchange Commission鈥檚 (SEC) climate disclosure rules continued on March 27, 2025, with the SEC Commissioners voting to discontinue the defense of such rules before the Eighth Circuit, Iowa v. SEC, No. 24-1522 (8th Cir.), which is where the numerous complaints challenging the rules were consolidated.[1] The SEC鈥檚 action does not withdraw or terminate the rules, but while they remain in place, the SEC鈥檚 previous stay of the rules continues. It will be interesting to see if the Democratic attorneys general from a number of states who joined the litigation in support of the rules will continue to defend the rules without the SEC鈥檚 support.
While the SEC has made clear that it will not be pursuing its climate disclosure rules[2], companies may still need to comply with climate disclosure laws of other jurisdictions, including the European Union鈥檚 Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive and California鈥檚 climate disclosure rules. In addition, legislation similar to California鈥檚 鈥淐limate Corporate Data Accountability Act鈥 (CA SB 253)[3] which was later amended by California Senate Bill 219[4] has been introduced in New York[5], Colorado[6], New Jersey[7], and Illinois[8] that would require companies with more than $1 billion in annual revenue and doing business in the particular state to annually report their greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, similar to what California will require beginning in 2026.
To add to the list of considerations for companies to keep on their radar, U.S. Senator Bill Hagerty recently introduced federal legislation to 鈥減rohibit entities integral to the national interests of the United States from participating in any foreign sustainability due diligence regulation, including the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive of the European Union鈥.[9] While Senator Hagerty鈥檚 bill appears to be symbolic and unlikely to be enacted, it has a private right of action that could prove troublesome if the legislation should be enacted.
[1] See, Press Release 2025-58, Securities and Exchange Commission, 鈥淪EC Votes to End Defense of Climate Disclosure Rules鈥 (March 27, 2025), .
[2] Securities and Exchange Commission, Final Rule 鈥淭he Enhancement and Standardization of Climate-Related Disclosures for Investors,鈥 17 CFR 210, 229, 230, 232, 239, and 249, adopting release available at .
[3] Cal. Health & Safety Code 搂 38532.
[4] Senate Bill 219, Greenhouse gases: climate corporate accountability: climate-related financial risk, Cal. Health & Safety Code 搂搂 38532, 38533, Bill Text available at .
[5] New York Senate Bill S3456, 鈥淐limate Corporate Accountability Act,鈥 available at .
[6] Colorado House Bill 25-1119, 鈥淎 Bill for an Act concerning requiring certain entities to disclose information concerning greenhouse gas emissions,鈥 available at .
[7] New Jersey Senate Bill 4117, “Climate Corporate Data Accountability Act,” available at .
[8] Illinois House Bill, 鈥淐limate Corporate Accountability Act,鈥 available at .
[9] Senate Bill 985, 119th Congress (2025-2026), 鈥樷楶revent Regulatory Overreach from Turning Essential Companies into Targets Act of 2025鈥欌 or the 鈥樷楶ROTECT USA Act of 2025,鈥欌 Bill Text available at