Climate change is the existential crisis of our lifetime, requiring immediate action to limit global warming to 1.5˚C. Countries have committed, through the Paris Agreement, to take measures to curb greenhouse gas emissions. Yet, fossil fuel suppliers around the world continue to bet against the Paris Agreement by further expanding fossil fuels exploration, extraction, and production, which exacerbates the climate crisis and impedes meaningful action to safeguard human rights. As fossil fuel suppliers continue to profit from the climate crisis, they have consistently evaded accountability for climate change by leaning on domestic climate mitigation policies void of supply-side measures and hiding behind a wall of impunity. This chapter examines how climate litigation is closing this supply-side accountability gap through the judiciary, using the Norwegian climate case People v. Arctic Oil as an example. Although a loss for the co-plaintiffs, the Norwegian decision is, in some respects, a step in the right direction and a warning to the fossil fuel industry. This is because, for the first time, the Supreme Court held that greenhouse gas emissions from Norwegian fossil fuel products that are combusted abroad (“exported emissions”) must be considered when analyzing the climate impacts of fossil fuel extraction and production.