Apple's legal battle over carbon neutrality claims for its Apple Watch models has taken an unexpected turn, with the Environmental Defense Fund filing an amicus brief in support of the tech giant. The lawsuit, filed in February 2025, represents seven buyers who challenge Apple's carbon neutral labelling of several Series 9 Apple Watch models. The plaintiffs allege that carbon credits from forest projects in Kenya and China used by Apple to support these claims do not actually reduce carbon emissions. The Environmental Defense Fund's 25-page filing describes Apple's practices as "eminently reasonable and consistent with industry practice". Elizabeth Sturcken, the EDF's Vice President of Net Zero Ambition & Action, says this marks the first time the organisation has weighed in on a corporate legal challenge of this nature. "We've filed this amicus brief because Apple is an undeniable climate leader," she explains. "Investors, employees and consumers are asking for companies to take climate action. “Companies need to be able to communicate this leadership."

The class-action suit centres on whether Apple adequately verified the quality of carbon offset projects backing its carbon neutral claims. One initiative referenced in Apple's carbon neutral strategy is currently under investigation, according to the lawsuit. The plaintiffs argue that Apple should have independently verified the credits being issued, rather than relying on existing verification systems. Apple reduces emissions associated with manufacturing the contested Apple Watch models by approximately 75% through its use of recycled materials, fibre-based packaging and lower-carbon shipping methods. The company then purchases verified carbon credits to offset the remaining 25% of emissions. The EDF is arguing that ruling in favour of the plaintiffs could create significant uncertainty in the voluntary carbon market. "Because few companies have the resources or expertise to engage in comprehensive (and duplicative) investigation of every offset project, the plaintiffs' legal theory would chill corporate action to mitigate climate change," the brief reads. The organisation also warns that requiring independent verification for every offset project would "disincentivise them from using their resources to support precisely the sort of emission-reduction projects society needs to address the climate crisis". Daniel Cherrin, Founder of North Coast Strategies, says that it is fairly uncommon for environmental non-profits to support corporations in greenwashing cases like this. "The EDF isn't defending Apple's brand, they are defending a model of climate leadership rooted in transparency, decarbonisation and credible use of offsets," he explains.

The case speaks to broader tensions around the climate claims of corporations and the voluntary carbon market's integrity. The EDF has acknowledged concerns about credit quality are warranted but argues that stricter methodologies by industry groups are addressing these issues. Elizabeth believes that companies should be encouraged to engage in carbon reductions. "More broadly, we need to see this leading climate action scale across the private sector, not get penalised," she says. On 19 May 2025, the plaintiffs updated their complaint to demand a jury trial. A hearing on Apple's motion to dismiss the lawsuit is scheduled for 27 August 2025 in US District Court in San Jose, California. Apple declined to comment on the amicus brief, referring to its previous statement expressing pride in its carbon neutral products.