Will the Supreme Court bar Boulder’s state-law climate claims against Suncor and Exxon?

US PoliticsOne-OffWeather2y

KalshiKullanılabilirliği kontrol etKYC gerekli%2 ücretDoğrulanmış sonuçlanma verisiKabaca kalibre

Güncel ima edilen olasılık

Evet 71%

Piyasa kalitesi

40 / 100

Düşük kalite

24s Hacim

₺0

Likidite

₺19 B

Düşük likidite

Alis / Satis

68.0% / 75.0%

Spread

7.0 pt

Geniş spread

Piyasa verileri

17 dakika önce guncellendi

22 Tem 26 20:591 Ağu 28 14:00

Trendler

Sonuç24sOlasılık

Yalnızca sanal bakiye, gerçek para yokYatırım tavsiyesi değildir

Seçilen sonuç

Yes71%

Tutar (USDT)

Kurallar

If the Supreme Court, in Suncor Energy (U.S.A.) Inc. v.

Commissioners of Boulder County, rules that federal law precludes Boulder County and the City of Boulder’s state-law claims seeking relief for injuries allegedly caused by interstate and international greenhouse-gas emissions’ effects on the global climate, then the market resolves to Yes.
The Payout Criterion for the Contract encompasses the Expiration Values that the Supreme Court of the United States has ruled that federal law precludes the state-law claims at issue seeking relief for injuries allegedly caused by the effects of interstate and international greenhouse-gas emissions on the global climate, after Issuance and before August 1, 2028.
A ruling only that the Court has statutory and Article III jurisdiction does not satisfy the criterion.
The market resolves to No if the Court rules that federal law does not preclude those claims, holds that it lacks jurisdiction, dismisses the writ as improvidently granted, or otherwise dismisses or remands the case without ruling on the merits described above.

Hacim trendi

$200

22 Tem2g veri23 Tem

İlgili Piyasalar

Will SCOTUS reject narrow Free Exercise tests for Catholic preschools?

₺0

Evet: 84%

KALSHI

Will SCOTUS allow Arizona’s citizenship-proof and pre-election noncitizen-removal rules?

₺0

Evet: 61%

KALSHI

Will SCOTUS bar contempt for conduct not clearly prohibited by an injunction?

₺0

Evet: 0%

KALSHI

Will SCOTUS bar unpled affirmative defenses at summary judgment?

₺0

Evet: 66%

KALSHI

Will SCOTUS let people seek green cards after their asylum is terminated?

₺0

Evet: 0%

KALSHI

Will SCOTUS count subscribers to a video provider’s non-video offerings as VPPA consumers?

₺0

Evet: 44%

KALSHI

Bu konularda aktif

BitcoinBTC$63,900.64-1.41%

EthereumETH$1,919.85-1.25%

SolanaSOL$74.12-1.94%

DogecoinDOGE$0.0708-1.40%

XRPXRP$1.07-2.13%

BNBBNB$571.39-0.36%

İlgili Haberler

Polymarket: Vance leads 2028 at 19.85% as pricing trend softensBlockchain.News

White House pushes Senate Democrats to take 'historic' crypto Clarity Act ethics dealCoindesk

Senate nears bipartisan CLARITY Act deal after ethics breakthroughCrypto News

White House agrees to ethics provisions in market structure billCointelegraph

Polymarket odds show Vance at 19.85% as Epstein files critique hits tapeBlockchain.News

Dick Durbin accuses Todd Blanche of shielding Trump’s crypto empireCrypto News

Kurallar

If the Supreme Court, in Suncor Energy (U.S.A.) Inc. v.

Commissioners of Boulder County, rules that federal law precludes Boulder County and the City of Boulder’s state-law claims seeking relief for injuries allegedly caused by interstate and international greenhouse-gas emissions’ effects on the global climate, then the market resolves to Yes.
The Payout Criterion for the Contract encompasses the Expiration Values that the Supreme Court of the United States has ruled that federal law precludes the state-law claims at issue seeking relief for injuries allegedly caused by the effects of interstate and international greenhouse-gas emissions on the global climate, after Issuance and before August 1, 2028.
A ruling only that the Court has statutory and Article III jurisdiction does not satisfy the criterion.
The market resolves to No if the Court rules that federal law does not preclude those claims, holds that it lacks jurisdiction, dismisses the writ as improvidently granted, or otherwise dismisses or remands the case without ruling on the merits described above.

Will the Supreme Court bar Boulder’s state-law climate claims against Suncor and Exxon?

US PoliticsOne-OffWeather2y

KalshiKullanılabilirliği kontrol etKYC gerekli%2 ücretDoğrulanmış sonuçlanma verisiKabaca kalibre

Güncel ima edilen olasılık

Evet 71%

Piyasa kalitesi

40 / 100

Düşük kalite

24s Hacim

₺0

Likidite

₺19 B

Düşük likidite

Alis / Satis

68.0% / 75.0%

Spread

7.0 pt

Geniş spread

Piyasa verileri

17 dakika önce guncellendi

22 Tem 26 20:591 Ağu 28 14:00

Trendler

Sonuç24sOlasılık

Yalnızca sanal bakiye, gerçek para yokYatırım tavsiyesi değildir

Seçilen sonuç

Yes71%

Tutar (USDT)

Kurallar

If the Supreme Court, in Suncor Energy (U.S.A.) Inc. v.

Commissioners of Boulder County, rules that federal law precludes Boulder County and the City of Boulder’s state-law claims seeking relief for injuries allegedly caused by interstate and international greenhouse-gas emissions’ effects on the global climate, then the market resolves to Yes.
The Payout Criterion for the Contract encompasses the Expiration Values that the Supreme Court of the United States has ruled that federal law precludes the state-law claims at issue seeking relief for injuries allegedly caused by the effects of interstate and international greenhouse-gas emissions on the global climate, after Issuance and before August 1, 2028.
A ruling only that the Court has statutory and Article III jurisdiction does not satisfy the criterion.
The market resolves to No if the Court rules that federal law does not preclude those claims, holds that it lacks jurisdiction, dismisses the writ as improvidently granted, or otherwise dismisses or remands the case without ruling on the merits described above.

Hacim trendi

$200

22 Tem2g veri23 Tem

İlgili Piyasalar

Will SCOTUS reject narrow Free Exercise tests for Catholic preschools?

₺0

Evet: 84%

KALSHI

Will SCOTUS allow Arizona’s citizenship-proof and pre-election noncitizen-removal rules?

₺0

Evet: 61%

KALSHI

Will SCOTUS bar contempt for conduct not clearly prohibited by an injunction?

₺0

Evet: 0%

KALSHI

Will SCOTUS bar unpled affirmative defenses at summary judgment?

₺0

Evet: 66%

KALSHI

Will SCOTUS let people seek green cards after their asylum is terminated?

₺0

Evet: 0%

KALSHI

Will SCOTUS count subscribers to a video provider’s non-video offerings as VPPA consumers?

₺0

Evet: 44%

KALSHI

Bu konularda aktif

BitcoinBTC$63,900.64-1.41%

EthereumETH$1,919.85-1.25%

SolanaSOL$74.12-1.94%

DogecoinDOGE$0.0708-1.40%

XRPXRP$1.07-2.13%

BNBBNB$571.39-0.36%

İlgili Haberler

Polymarket: Vance leads 2028 at 19.85% as pricing trend softensBlockchain.News

White House pushes Senate Democrats to take 'historic' crypto Clarity Act ethics dealCoindesk

Senate nears bipartisan CLARITY Act deal after ethics breakthroughCrypto News

White House agrees to ethics provisions in market structure billCointelegraph

Polymarket odds show Vance at 19.85% as Epstein files critique hits tapeBlockchain.News

Dick Durbin accuses Todd Blanche of shielding Trump’s crypto empireCrypto News

Kurallar

If the Supreme Court, in Suncor Energy (U.S.A.) Inc. v.

Commissioners of Boulder County, rules that federal law precludes Boulder County and the City of Boulder’s state-law claims seeking relief for injuries allegedly caused by interstate and international greenhouse-gas emissions’ effects on the global climate, then the market resolves to Yes.
The Payout Criterion for the Contract encompasses the Expiration Values that the Supreme Court of the United States has ruled that federal law precludes the state-law claims at issue seeking relief for injuries allegedly caused by the effects of interstate and international greenhouse-gas emissions on the global climate, after Issuance and before August 1, 2028.
A ruling only that the Court has statutory and Article III jurisdiction does not satisfy the criterion.
The market resolves to No if the Court rules that federal law does not preclude those claims, holds that it lacks jurisdiction, dismisses the writ as improvidently granted, or otherwise dismisses or remands the case without ruling on the merits described above.