Judges Lose Climate Guidance After State Lawyers Push Back

The Federal Judicial Center recently removed a climate‑science section from its 1, 682‑page reference guide that judges use to understand scientific evidence. A coalition of attorneys general from 27 states, including Utah, wrote a letter last month demanding the removal. They argued that the section was written by people linked to university programs that, in their view, push left‑leaning political agendas against states and energy companies. The House Judiciary Committee also sent a letter to the Judicial Conference, saying the climate part seemed designed to help plaintiffs who claim harm from fossil‑fuel products. Critics said the guide showed bias in several places. For example, when two experts disagree, it told judges to “seek clarification on how representative of the scientific community the two views are. ” It also warned that public perception of science can differ from what scientists actually agree on, citing past manipulation in tobacco and ozone debates.The guide urged judges to question scientists who speak outside their specialty, saying this has hurt public trust in science on topics like climate change. Co‑authors of the chapter were environmental lawyer Jessica Wentz and Columbia University scientist Radley Horton. The guide also referenced works by Michael Mann and Naomi Oreskes. During the Trump administration, officials like Secretary of Energy Chris Wright and EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin published a study saying it is still uncertain how much humans contribute to long‑term warming. The study’s author, former Obama adviser Steven Koonin, criticized the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change for missing data in its reports. The attorneys general’s letter echoed these doubts, saying the chapter presented science as unquestionable while hiding conflicts of interest. Ethics experts noted that such omissions raise serious concerns about the integrity of the guide.