Nearly every state that has filed a climate lawsuit enlisted expensive outside counsel to support its case – except Connecticut.  That changed over the summer, when the state issued a request for proposals seeking outside law firms to “support and add depth” to the case it first filed in 2020. These responses were due in July and as of now, the state has yet to announce a firm.  

On paper, the solicitation looks like a routine procurement. But in context, it’s the latest move in a trend of states leaning on outside counsel to plug gaps in staffing, legal strategy, and national coordination. Connecticut is simply catching up. 

The timing – over five years since Connecticut Attorney General Tong filed the case – highlights a broader pattern in the climate litigation ecosystem. The list of outside counsel in such cases is small, with San Francisco- based plaintiffs’ firm Sher Edling serving on the majority of suits. Neighboring Massachusetts turned to Sher Edling late in the game for its suit and, on the other side of the country, California brought them on midway to further a coordinated litigation strategy that – according to AG Bonta – gives them a sharper edge in the courtroom.  

The deadline for responses to the RFP has come and gone, and the Connecticut should be asked: Who applied? Did the state pick a firm? Why hasn’t it been announced? Did the state seek counsel after all these years because they were missing that “sharper edge”? 

Read the full post at EIDClimate.org.