A conservative climate policy group is urging action against judicial manipulation in climate litigation.
Story Snapshot
- Rep. Jim Jordan is urged to subpoena the Environmental Law Institute’s Climate Judiciary Project for alleged manipulation.
- Chevron’s court filing reveals potential undisclosed involvement of plaintiffs’ attorneys in scientific studies.
- Conservative groups call for transparency in judicial education and climate litigation.
- House Judiciary Committee investigates antitrust violations in climate advocacy.
Conservative Groups Call for Action
Conservative climate policy group, the American Energy Institute, has requested that Rep. Jim Jordan, Chair of the House Judiciary Committee, subpoena records from the Environmental Law Institute’s Climate Judiciary Project. This request follows a court filing by Chevron in the case of Multnomah County v. ExxonMobil et al., which suggests that plaintiffs’ attorneys may have been involved in influencing scientific studies used as neutral evidence in climate lawsuits. The potential manipulation of judicial education materials has raised concerns among conservative circles.
The American Energy Institute, led by CEO Jason Isaac, is advocating for transparency. They argue that the alleged manipulation undermines the neutrality of scientific evidence and judicial training in climate-related cases. This development adds fuel to the ongoing debate over the role of advocacy groups in shaping climate litigation outcomes.
Allegations of Judicial Manipulation
The Environmental Law Institute’s Climate Judiciary Project, a nonprofit focused on providing climate science education to judges, is facing accusations of judicial manipulation. The allegations suggest that the project may have coordinated with plaintiffs’ attorneys to influence the content of scientific studies used in climate lawsuits. These claims have been strongly denied by Nick Collins, ELI spokesperson, who asserts that the project maintains neutrality and does not engage in litigation.
The controversy has prompted the House Judiciary Committee, led by Jim Jordan, to issue subpoenas to various climate advocacy groups. The committee’s investigation seeks to uncover alleged antitrust violations and collusion in climate litigation. This move aligns with Republican efforts to challenge climate policy initiatives and ESG investing, which they view as potential threats to economic stability.
Potential Impacts and Future Developments
The outcome of the House Judiciary Committee’s investigation could have significant implications for climate lawsuits and judicial independence. In the short term, there may be increased scrutiny on climate advocacy groups and judicial education programs, potentially affecting climate litigation and advocacy efforts. In the long term, legislative reforms to antitrust laws may be considered, leading to changes in how scientific evidence and judicial education are managed in climate cases.
Jim Jordan pressed to subpoena climate group accused of 'judicial manipulation' https://t.co/emX1Vb2pPI
— Fox News Politics (@foxnewspolitics) September 24, 2025
The broader political context underscores the tension between conservative policymakers and climate advocacy organizations. As the investigation unfolds, it is essential to monitor how these developments impact the ongoing debates over climate policy and the role of advocacy groups in the judicial system.
Sources:
Jim Jordan pressed to subpoena climate group accused of ‘judicial manipulation’
House Judiciary subpoenas ESG, net-zero advocates, allege antitrust violation
