No. 25-48
Tarek Farag v. Climate United Fund, et al.
Response WaivedRelisted (2)
Tags: climate-change corruption-allegations fossil-fuel intervention-motion legal-standing scientific-evidence
Latest Conference:
2026-01-09
(distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (from Petition)
I. Did the District Court and Appellate Court err in denying petitioner's motion to intervene?
II. Did the District Court and Appellete Court err in failing to address petitioner's opposition to the Hoax?
III. Should a citizen have the right to prosecute law enforcement or public officials for alleged corruption?
IV. Courts should reduce the amount of paperwork.
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the District Court and Appellate Court erred in denying petitioner's motion to intervene and addressing claims of a climate change 'hoax'
Docket Entries
2026-01-12
Rehearing DENIED.
2025-12-16
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/9/2026.
2025-10-28
Petition for Rehearing filed.
2025-10-06
Petition DENIED.
2025-08-27
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/29/2025.
2025-08-08
Waiver of Federal Party of right to respond submitted.
2025-08-08
Waiver of right of respondent Federal Party to respond filed.
2025-07-21
Waiver of right of respondents California Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank to respond filed.
2025-07-08
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due August 14, 2025)
Attorneys
California Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank
Diana Li Kim — California Department of Justice, Respondent
Federal Party
D. John Sauer — Solicitor General, Respondent
Illinois Finance Authority
Alex Hemmer — Office of the Illinois Attorney General, Respondent
Tarek Farag
Tarek Farag — Petitioner