The Legal Examiner Mark The Legal Examiner Mark The Legal Examiner Mark search twitter facebook feed linkedin instagram google-plus avvo phone envelope checkmark mail-reply spinner error close
Skip to main content

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, in cooperation with the U.S. Hispanic Chamber of Commerce and the National Association of Manufacturers, filed an amicus brief on Monday in support of BP’s latest attempt to renege on its Settlement Agreement with individuals and businesses of the Gulf Coast.

The U.S. Chamber is no friend of Gulf businesses and is not to be confused with the hundreds of legitimate local Chambers of Commerce that champion entrepreneurs. No, the U.S. Chamber is a puppet of very big business, which counts on the confusion involving its name to work against the interests of small business owners everywhere.

Is it the “U.S.” or “U.K.” Chamber of Commerce?

Members of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce should ask their leadership exactly who the organization represents – one massive British oil company convicted of multiple felonies? Or the tens of thousands of businesses of the United State of America? If the former, a name change to the U.K Chamber of Commerce seems in order.

BP Works to Discourage Participation

While BP has been largely unsuccessful in its dishonest legal challenges to extract itself from its own Settlement Agreement, the company has taken to the airwaves and newspapers to express its displeasure with the American court system and the business owners of the Gulf Coast. Reportedly, BP has spent $1 billion on legal fees and $500 million on advertisements in this unprecedented attempt to purchase its own brand of justice.

Macroeconomic Damage to Gulf Businesses Immense

BP’s strategy, and now the adopted strategy of the U.S. / U.K. Chamber of Commerce, is to suggest that claimants who otherwise pass the rigorous and explicit causation requirements detailed in the 1,200 page Settlement Agreement were not necessarily harmed by the company’s disaster. But the evidence suggests otherwise. First, macroeconomic data indicates that nearly all Gulf-area industries were impacted. The trickle-down effect was substantial as is detailed in this December 2013 study by economist Dr. Timothy Ryan, Ph.D.

Second, if a business meets one of the several causation tests found in Exhibit 4B, it was by definition harmed. It may not be obvious to the untrained financial eye, but a forensic accounting bears this out.

Consider the Source

Consider the source when confronted with BP’s claims. Believing BP, and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce – in court and in advertisements – requires giving the pair a very large dose of the benefit of the doubt. By all accounts, BP is undeserving. The company is described by the United States Department of Justice as being a manipulative, obstructive, less than forthright entity, with a propensity for providing false and misleading information. Likewise, the U.S. / U.K. Chamber deserves no quarter.

A Friend of the Devil is no Friend of the Court

Finally, in a legal context, “amicus” means “a friend of the court.” The purpose of an amicus brief is to inform the court of the law by expounding on it in an impartial manner. Unfortunately, the U.S. / U.K. Chamber of Commerce is only a friend of BP’s, not the Court. The 5th Circuit Court of Appeals should roundly reject the U.S. / U.K. Chamber’s dishonest attempt at judicial friendship.



  1. Gravatar for Rick Lacey

    Excellent article outing this lobbying organization for posing as a US Government institution! Add it to the long list of organizations BP has bought and corrupted. After buying off so many of our trusted institutions, BP is confident it will get away with something this transparent.

  2. Gravatar for Poundstone

    Please note the rule below. If the US Camber of Commerce did indeed file a motion for leave to file an Amicus Curiea brief, then they have already done so. The brief itself is required when they file a motion to file said brief. If no brief is yet filed on the 25th March, 2014 then they are enjoined from doing so at any later time. I hope they have not and leave this to the courts for proper consideration and rejection.

    FED. R. APP. P. WITH 5TH CIR. R. & IOPs


    (e) Time for Filing. An amicus curiae must file its brief, accompanied by a motion for filing when necessary, no later than 7 days after the principal brief of the party being supported is filed. An amicus curiae that does not support either party must file its brief no later than 7 days after the appellant’s or petitioner’s principal brief is filed. A court may grant leave for later filing, specifying the time within which an opposing party may answer.

Comments are closed.

Of Interest