Energy Advocacy Group Demands Investigation into Alleged Coordinated Efforts to Influence Climate Litigation Judges

FIRST ON FOX A leading pro-energy organization is urging the Trump administration to investigate what it believes may be a coordinated campaign, referred to as a national lawfare campaign, designed by left-wing climate activists to sway judges in climate litigation cases.

This week, Dan Turner, the Founder and Executive Director of Power the Future, sent a letter to Attorney General Pam Bondi highlighting concerns about the Federal Judicial Center’s role in this initiative. The organization claims the FJC has partnered with the Environmental Law Institute’s Climate Judiciary Project to engage in advocacy tactics that operate behind closed doors.

Turner’s letter raises alarms regarding the FJC allegedly assisting in a campaign that has purportedly educated around two thousand judges, including federal judges, on approaches to climate litigation. The letter identifies a significant issue, stating that climate litigation often aims to impose federal energy policies through judicial means, despite such matters traditionally falling under the purview of the legislative and executive branches of government. Moreover, it argues that the FJC has conducted seminars for judges with speakers solely aligned with the interests of the plaintiffs involved in such litigation.

Climate Judiciary Project’s Goals and Activities

The Environmental Law Institute, based in Washington, D.C., established the Climate Judiciary Project in 2018 to provide reliable and current information regarding climate change litigation. This initiative has expanded its influence across various state and federal courts, including influential appellate courts. This development coincides with numerous cities and states pursuing high-profile legal actions against the oil industry, further intensifying the debate surrounding climate change and its legal implications.

Connections and Criticism

A review by Fox News Digital in December revealed that several expert lawyers and judges connected to the Climate Judiciary Project share close ties to its curriculum and exhibit substantial involvement in climate litigation. At that time, the project attempted to distance itself from allegations of bias, asserting that it does not partake in litigation or advise judges on courtroom rulings.

In its letter to the Department of Justice, Power the Future included Freedom of Information Act requests. These requests allegedly unveiled coordination between judges and the network associated with the Environmental Law Institute.

Judge Tatel’s Involvement Revealed

Among the documents obtained was a reference to Judge David Tatel, a U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit judge for nearly three decades until 2022. One email from Dr. Don Wuebbles, a plaintiff’s witness and climate science expert coordinated by the ELI, discussed concerns that Judge Tatel raised during discussions meant to counter arguments from skeptics regarding catastrophic climate change.

Response from Scientific Community

Dr. Wuebbles defended the educational efforts aimed at judges, describing them as professional exchanges focused on scientific knowledge rather than activist agendas. He expressed that being transparent about climate science serves the public good and ensures decision-makers, including judges, understand the realities of climate change.

FOIA Revelations Include Judge Communications

The DOJ letter referred to additional emails obtained through FOIA requests, such as one dated March 23, 2021, where Climate Judiciary Project founder Paul Hanle communicated with Dr. Ben Santer, a seasoned expert witness involved in climate litigation. Hanle noted the effectiveness of Santer’s presentations on climate science for judges, underscoring the project’s aim to influence judicial thought processes.

Santer, when queried about his communications with judges, highlighted his role in enhancing understanding of climate change through educational presentations to various audiences.

Federal Judicial Center’s Defense

Upon being contacted for a statement, Clara Altman, the Deputy Director of the Federal Judicial Center, clarified that the FJC has not collaborated with ELI since 2020. She stated that any programs conducted were designed to provide balanced content from diverse perspectives to judges.

Concerns About Judicial Education Programs

Recent reports revealed that the Climate Judiciary Project launched an online forum involving judges to share favorable information and updates about climate litigation, only for it to be made private after scrutiny arose. This forum had been operational from September 2022 until May 2024, fostering discussions on climate studies and legal trends amongst its members.

In one instance, a judge from Delaware shared a video discussing climate lawsuits and their potential to financially impact the fossil fuel sector, cautioning peers about the confidentiality of the judicial event content.

Allegations of Bias and Ethical Implications

Allegations of bias have surfaced as critics scrutinize the Climate Judiciary Project, with lawmakers claiming it participates in unlawfully influencing judicial outcomes through climate litigation. Senator Ted Cruz accused the group of participating in a systematic campaign to utilize the courts to undermine American energy policies, asserting that the project is integral in achieving what he termed judicial capture.

The Ongoing Debate on Climate Litigation

The increasing number of climate-related lawsuits continues to attract attention, with legal actions targeting major oil companies for alleged misleading advertising and negligence in addressing pollution risks. The pushback against alleged lawfare from conservative lawmakers emphasizes the polarization of views surrounding climate change and its legal ramifications.

The discourse regarding the relationship between judges and climate activists has persisted for years, with various incidents illustrating a series of ethical dilemmas. Some judges have faced backlash for their communications with climate organizations while others defended their actions as merely part of judicial education.

Next Steps in Addressing Claims

As calls for transparency in judicial education mount, both Power the Future and the Environmental Law Institute assert their commitment to the integrity of climate science and judicial processes. Continuous scrutiny from various stakeholders aims to ensure that the principles of impartiality and fairness remain paramount in the growing field of climate litigation.

The ultimate outcome of these accusations remains uncertain, but the interplay between energy policy, judiciary independence, and climate science will undoubtedly remain in the forefront of public discussion in the coming years.

Fox News Digital’s Breanne Deppisch contributed to this report.