Democratic lawmakers are twisting the federal judiciary’s arm to restore a controversial climate science chapter that was recently removed from its flagship reference guide for judges, a move that comes amid broader scrutiny over the intersection of climate litigation, judicial education, and political advocacy. [some emphasis, links added]
At stake is not merely a single chapter in a reference book, but the perception of neutrality in how federal judges are trained to evaluate complex scientific claims, particularly when those claims sit at the center of high-dollar, politically charged litigation campaigns still unfolding in courts across the country.
According to reporting from Politico, a group of Senate Democrats led by Ron Wyden (D-OR) sent a letter Friday urging the Federal Judicial Center (FJC) to reinstate a deleted climate chapter from the latest edition of the Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence.
The lawmakers argued that removing the chapter “sends a clear and chilling message that the federal judiciary is susceptible to partisan political pressure.”
The FJC is the research and education wing of the judicial branch. It guides and trains federal judges, gives resources, publishes materials, and maintains resources on federal judicial history and procedures.
The Reference Manual is widely used by federal judges as a guide to evaluating complex scientific and technical evidence.
The now-removed climate section had drawn objections from a group of state attorneys general who argued that it adopted contested climate attribution methodologies and liability theories that mirror arguments currently being advanced in active climate lawsuits against energy companies.
Critics contended that including such material in an official judicial reference guide risked lending institutional credibility to one side of ongoing litigation.
The FJC has not publicly characterized the removal as politically motivated, but the timing followed the objections, prompting Democrats to frame the move as capitulation to outside pressure.
Senator Wyden’s advocacy for restoring the chapter has also drawn attention because of his financial and public ties to a climate litigation attorney whose courtroom tactics have faced scrutiny.
Federal Election Commission records show Wyden has received approximately $11,000 in campaign contributions from Roger Worthington, an Oregon-based attorney involved in climate liability cases.
Worthington has been associated with legal strategies seeking to hold fossil fuel companies financially responsible for climate-related damages. He has also donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to Democratic campaigns and causes in the reliably blue state over his career.
Read rest at Daily Wire
There are many things wrong with climate law fare. One they try to hold companies in Anytown USA accountable for emissions when most of these are coming from China and other nations. The concept of holding a company liable for its legal product is outrageous. This is the same as holding breweries liable for drunk driving deaths. For any product, it is the end user that responsible. Perhaps the worst thing is the use of climate attribution. This is a technique designed to off set the fact that extreme weather is not getting more extreme or more common.
$11,000 to buy a senator. That’s cheap!
Ah, he’s just providing constituency help so nothing to see here! Just move on…