PG&E’s Hidden Bankruptcy Secrets EXPOSED — And Why I’m Taking It to the Supreme Court

Fire victims and California residents — I want to share important information about PG&E, the Fire Victim Trust, and recent developments involving large‑scale infrastructure planning in California. Over the past several years, many fire victims have struggled to obtain transparency and accountability in the aftermath of PG&E’s bankruptcy. Numerous individuals, including Will Abrams, have raised concerns about the treatment of victims in court, the availability of meaningful hearings, and the difficulty of obtaining unredacted documents related to settlements and trust operations. These concerns have persisted through multiple proceedings, including requests for greater disclosure in the Fire Victim Trust. Over the past six months, I have conducted an extensive review of CPUC filings, SEC filings, and related regulatory materials. During this review, I identified documentation suggesting that PG&E has been engaged in long‑range planning for a large‑scale, technologically intensive grid intended to support emerging data‑center and AI‑related electrical loads. Based on the filings I examined, this planning appears to involve significant capital expenditures and infrastructure development. The materials I reviewed raise questions about whether certain future obligations and cost burdens were fully disclosed during PG&E’s Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceedings. Specifically, the filings I examined did not appear to include detailed information about a separate high‑capacity grid or its associated long‑term financial implications. If material obligations were omitted from bankruptcy disclosures, that could have implications for the integrity of the bankruptcy process, regulatory oversight, and the ability of creditors and victims to fully understand PG&E’s financial posture. Because of these concerns, I am preparing to file a petition for a writ of certiorari with the United States Supreme Court under Rule 20. This petition will argue that constitutional issues, disclosure integrity, and structural defects in the bankruptcy process warrant judicial review. When the Supreme Court receives such a petition, it may request responses from the parties, schedule oral argument, and ultimately decide whether to grant review. If review is granted, the Court could examine whether the bankruptcy proceedings complied with federal law and whether victims’ rights were adequately protected. My goal is to ensure that fire victims receive full and fair consideration under the law. Many victims have waited years for compensation, and the Fire Victim Trust has faced persistent concerns about transparency, delays, and valuation. These issues have had real consequences for individuals and families who lost homes, communities, and loved ones. In addition to bankruptcy‑related concerns, I have reviewed filings related to large‑scale data‑center development in California. These projects involve substantial electrical loads and infrastructure demands. Based on the filings I examined, some of these developments appear to have proceeded without the level of environmental review, public notice, or community engagement that residents would ordinarily expect for projects of this scale. California’s legacy electrical grid is more than a century old, and many components require significant maintenance or replacement. If resources are diverted toward new infrastructure without adequate attention to existing systems, communities could face reliability challenges. It is important for regulators and utilities to ensure that all infrastructure decisions are transparent, environmentally sound, and protective of public health. My petition to the Supreme Court will raise constitutional questions about disclosure, due process, regulatory oversight, and the rights of fire victims. It will also address concerns about the Fire Victim Trust’s structure, transparency, and administration. These issues deserve careful judicial consideration. To prepare the petition in compliance with Supreme Court Rules 33.1 and 33.2, I am raising funds to cover printing, binding, and submission costs. This is not for attorney fees or personal compensation; it is solely for the required production of Supreme Court‑compliant filings. I will provide full transparency regarding all costs. Any attorneys or organizations interested in supporting this effort — including those with experience in PG&E‑related litigation — are welcome to participate. Collaboration strengthens the petition and helps ensure that fire victims’ voices are heard. My objective is straightforward: to seek judicial review of structural issues that have affected fire victims for years and to ensure that all relevant facts are evaluated under federal law. I am committed to pursuing this through lawful, constitutional channels, and I will continue to provide updates as the petition progresses. Thank you for your time, your support, and your commitment to justice for fire victims.