Key Points:
- The federal judiciary removed a climate science chapter from its judges’ manual.
- Republican attorneys general argued the content was biased against fossil fuel companies.
- West Virginia AG JB McCuskey led the effort to have the section deleted.
- The chapter was designed to help judges evaluate scientific evidence in climate lawsuits.
The U.S. federal judiciary has abruptly removed a chapter on climate change from its official guide for judges. The decision came after a group of Republican state attorneys general complained that the material was biased against oil and gas companies.
The Federal Judicial Center (FJC), which researches and produces educational materials for the courts, released the fourth edition of its scientific evidence manual in December. For the first time, it included a chapter specifically addressing climate science. The manual is a standard reference tool for judges who need to understand complex scientific testimony during trials.
However, the inclusion of climate science sparked an immediate backlash. On January 29, a coalition of 27 Republican attorneys general, led by West Virginia’s JB McCuskey, sent a letter demanding the chapter be removed. They argued that the section took a side on “hotly disputed questions” and claimed the authors, who are from Columbia Law School, supported litigation against the energy industry.
On Friday, the FJC bowed to the pressure. In a letter to the complaining states and a federal judge, the center confirmed it would withdraw the chapter. McCuskey celebrated the victory, stating that keeping the section would have “tipped the scales” toward left-leaning climate policies in courtrooms across the country.
The removed section was written to help judges decide what kind of expert testimony is admissible in court. This is becoming a critical issue as more local governments sue fossil fuel companies over damages caused by extreme weather and rising sea levels. The Republican officials argued that the guide would have encouraged judges to accept climate attribution science without enough critical questioning.
Despite the removal, a remnant of the chapter remains. The manual’s foreword, written by Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan, still mentions the topic. She noted that in the coming years, judges will inevitably face lawsuits regarding “artificial intelligence, climate science, and epidemiology.”
The FJC declined to comment on the situation on Monday. The authors of the chapter have also remained silent. The manual will now move forward without the specific guidance on how to handle the growing number of climate-related legal battles.
