Revealed conversation reveals close relationships between judges and climate advocates, spurring ethical debates
The Climate Judiciary Project (CJP), established in 2018 by the Environmental Law Institute (ELI), aims to provide judges with authoritative and objective education on climate science, its impacts, and how climate science arises in legal contexts. According to Senator Ted Cruz, the CJP may be funded by China and left-wing activists, with the intention of influencing judges to support climate litigation. However, specific details about the direct funding from China or how it is connected to the project are not explicitly mentioned.
CJP operates an email-styled listserv where leaders from the Judicial Leaders in Climate Science program can message directly with judges. The listserv, active from September 2022 to May 2024, included messages between at least five judges and CJP employees discussing climate studies, updates on recent climate cases, and encouraging participation in CJP meet-ups.
However, critics argue that this communication could potentially manipulate the judicial system by training judges to be more favourable to climate litigation, a form of "judicial capture" where the project's financial backers may influence judges' decisions.
The Judicial Leaders in Climate Science program trains state court judges on judicial leadership skills integrated with consensus climate science and its application in the law. CJP pitches itself as a platform that provides judges with authoritative, objective, and trusted education on climate science.
Delaware Judge Travis Laster shared a YouTube video of a climate presentation in the group, cautioning members not to forward or use the video without checking with him. Indiana Court of Appeals Judge Stephen Scheele responded positively to Laster's video, praising it as "great work" and thanking him for sharing. Judge Scheele's office stated that he first joined the CJP forum in 2022 as a representative for Indiana's state court administration, and does not recall any substantive communication on the listserv.
The CJP's educational events are done in partnership with leading national judicial education institutions and state judicial authorities, following their accepted standards. CJP's curriculum is fact-based and science-first, grounded in consensus reports and developed with a robust peer review process that meets the highest scholarly standards.
Critics such as Sen. Ted Cruz claim that CJP's collaboration with the National Judicial College means court staff are helping far-left climate activists lobby and direct judges. The number of climate-related lawsuits in the U.S. has increased significantly in recent years, including during the last two years of the Biden administration.
As the CJP ramps up its number of "engagement opportunities" to "every six months for both cohorts of judges to come together to share updates and connect with one another", the implications for the judicial system and energy policy remain a topic of debate. Critics fear that this could lead to more favorable rulings for climate activists, which could affect energy companies and policy development.
Further investigation into these topics would require additional sources providing more detailed information on each point, especially regarding the financial connections and specific implications on judicial decisions.
- The Climate Judiciary Project (CJP) operates a listserv where judges and CJP employees discuss climate studies and updates on recent climate cases, potentially leading to concerns of possible manipulation of the judicial system.
- Critics argue that the CJP's collaboration with leading national judicial education institutions and state judicial authorities could result in a form of "judicial capture," where the project's financial backers might influence judges' decisions.
- Senator Ted Cruz claims that the CJP's tie with the National Judicial College may assist far-left climate activists in lobbying and directing judges, which could impact energy companies and policy development.
- Investigations into the CJP's financial connections and the specific implications on judicial decisions require additional sources to provide more detailed information on the stated concerns.
