Lead Counsel in $52 Billion Big Oil Lawsuit Facing Ethical Misconduct Allegations over Climate Activism

The lead counsel in a $52 billion dollar lawsuit against Big Oil is under fire for alleged involvement with climate activism and the left-leaning Climate Judiciary Project.

Multnomah County, Ore., filed lawsuits against several oil companies in 2023 in response to the 2021 heat dome in the Pacific Northwest that killed hundreds of people, including dozens of people in the county. County officials allege in lawsuits against Chevron and ExxonMobil that the heat dome was caused by climate change.

Now, a new motion filed in Multnomah County Circuit Court accuses Roger Worthington, lead counsel for the plaintiffs and partner at Worthington & Caron, of ethical misconduct — both for his participation in disseminating CJP materials and his involvement with various climate change studies published in the science journal Nature.

Worthington introduced these studies that he participated in as evidence in court, according to the motion, but did not disclose his involvement, instead framing the work as independent scientific research.

“According to Oregon Rules of Professional Conduct Rule 3.3, entitled ‘Candor Toward The Tribunal,’ Mr. Worthington, as plaintiff’s counsel, should have fully disclosed his or his firm’s involvement in the text or bylines of any articles and op-eds, and/or to the Court and opposing counsel, especially because the plaintiff, Multnomah County, submitted those articles as purportedly objective evidence,” John Shu, a legal scholar who served in both Bush administrations, told National Review.

Further, the motion addresses Worthington’s authorship of climate op-eds in various Oregon-based publications, where he asks questions like, “With all these dire and irrefutable warnings, why do we continue to delay holding Big Oil accountable for their deception that has generated so much life-threatening greenhouse gas pollution? Why do we kick the can down the road?”

In one climate op-ed, Worthington questions whether Big Oil caused the 2021 heat dome. A disclosure on the article describes Worthington as owning Worthy Brewing in Bend and Indie Hops in Portland. “He served as an attorney for Multnomah County on the case alluded to in this column, though he said he wrote this as a private citizen,” the disclosure adds.

Shu finds concerns with Worthington’s description of himself in light of the ongoing lawsuit.

“Mr. Worthington’s describing himself, in his June 30, 2025, Bend Bulletin op-ed, only as the owner of ‘Worthy Brewing in Bend and Indie Hops in Portland’ indicates a potential intent to conceal his serving as plaintiff’s counsel,” Shu said. “The trial court has broad discretion in choosing whether to hold an evidentiary hearing on the issue and/or to strike from evidence any publications with which plaintiff’s counsel was involved.”

Worthington’s connection to the CJP, which has been criticized for its attempt to influence judges to agree with left-leaning policies on climate-related issues, was also an issue addressed in the motion.

The firm allegedly had access to a pre-published version of CJP education modules, the motion says, and the modules were posted on the firm’s website, suggesting Worthington was working with CJP because he had access to the curriculum before it was posted on the CJP website.

“The Climate Judiciary Project does not participate in or provide support for litigation, and we have not coordinated with Mr. Worthington,” the Environmental Law Institute, the group that created the CJP program, told National Review. “CJP provides evidence-based continuing education to judges about climate science and how it arises in the law. Our curriculum is fact-based and science-first, grounded in consensus reports and developed with a robust peer review process that meets the highest scholarly standards.”

The firm’s website also has a designated tab, titled “Big Oil Lied. People Died.” in which it provides information on current lawsuits and movements in the case and related climate concerns the firm has.

Worthington & Caron did not respond to National Review’s request for comment by the time of publication.