The Climate Judiciary Project (CJP), an initiative by the Environmental Law Institute, has removed judges’ names from its website following a report by Fox News Digital. The report revealed that CJP had maintained a private online forum for years where judges and CJP leadership exchanged updates on climate litigation. This forum was made private in May 2024.
Republican lawmakers, including Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas, have accused CJP of attempting to influence judges to support climate litigation tactics. In response to these accusations, CJP’s testimonial page was revised this summer, removing praise from judges who participated in the program. Among those whose comments were removed was Judge Sam Scheele of Indiana’s Lake Superior Court’s Civil Division.
A spokesperson for the Environmental Law Institute said that changes were made to protect privacy and prevent harassment. “Judges are encouraged, and many required, to participate in continuing education on topics relevant to emerging trends in the law – including those related to science,” the spokesperson said.
Judge Scheele’s office clarified his participation in the forum, stating he joined the 2022 National Judicial Conference on Climate Science as a last-minute replacement delegate before his appointment to the Indiana Court of Appeals. His office emphasized his commitment to unbiased justice and noted that he does not recall any substantive communication on the listserv mentioned.
The now-defunct email list created by CJP in September 2022 aimed to facilitate communication among members of its Judicial Leaders in Climate Science program. This one-year program, developed with the National Judicial College, trains state court judges on integrating climate science into legal proceedings.
Senator Cruz has been vocal about his concerns regarding CJP’s activities, arguing that they are part of a broader campaign by left-wing activists and foreign entities like China to undermine American energy dominance through legal means. However, CJP denies these allegations and maintains that it provides neutral information about climate science relevant to litigation.
The controversy surrounding CJP highlights ongoing debates over judicial impartiality and the role of educational programs in shaping legal perspectives on climate change.
Information from this article can be found here.
