‘Shocking and inappropriate’: Legal experts slam judges’ guide over climate bias claims
Ask who never gets charged.
A gold-standard guide used by judges nationwide to address subjects they are not particularly versed in is drawing criticism over the latest edition’s inclusion of purported ideological bias focused on its climate section.
Critics have said the fourth edition of the Federal Judicial Center’s Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence – which includes a foreword by Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan – appears to blur the line between neutrally educating judges and indoctrinating them with left-wing advocates’ prose.
The approximately 1,600-page guide was released at the beginning of the year and includes several citations and footnotes to climate change activists and proponents, including climatologist Michael Mann and environmental law expert Jessica Wentz.
CLIMATE DEADLINES COLLIDE WITH POLITICS AS DEM-LED STATES CHASE BIG OIL IN COURT BUT SPARE LOCAL REFINERS
Wentz is the topline expert at the Climate Judiciary Project at the Environmental Law Institute — an entity currently under federal investigation, as Fox News Digital recently reported.
"The Committee on the Judiciary is investigating allegations of improper attempts by the Environmental Law Institute (ELI) and its Climate Judiciary Project (CJP) to influence federal judges," read a statement from House Judiciary Committee members Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, and Darrell Issa, R-Calif.
Jordan and Issa found evidence of efforts to "influence judges who potentially may be presiding over lawsuits related to alleged climate change claims… [which] appear to have the underlying goal of predisposing federal judges in favor of plaintiffs alleging injuries from the manufacturing, marketing, use, or sale of fossil-fuel products."
SCOOP: WHITE HOUSE BACKS IMPEACHING 'ROGUE' JUDGES ACCUSED OF PARTISAN RULINGS
A spokesperson for the institute told Fox News Digital at the time that CJP’s curriculum is "fact-based and science-first, grounded in consensus reports and developed with a robust peer review process" and that suggestions otherwise are "without merit."
Wentz, who is also a senior fellow at Columbia’s Sabin Center for Climate Law, is listed as chief author of the section, along with fellow university faculty Radley Horton, on page 1561.
She served as a witness for the plaintiffs in Juliana v. U.S., which youth activists brought accusing the U.S. government of violating their constitutional rights by failing to implement their preferred climate change policies.
She also signed an amicus brief supporting the Obama administration’s environmental regulations after multiple states filed lawsuits against the EPA in 2016. …
Ask who never gets charged.
A gold-standard guide used by judges nationwide to address subjects they are not particularly versed in is drawing criticism over the latest edition’s inclusion of purported ideological bias focused on its climate section.
Critics have said the fourth edition of the Federal Judicial Center’s Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence – which includes a foreword by Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan – appears to blur the line between neutrally educating judges and indoctrinating them with left-wing advocates’ prose.
The approximately 1,600-page guide was released at the beginning of the year and includes several citations and footnotes to climate change activists and proponents, including climatologist Michael Mann and environmental law expert Jessica Wentz.
CLIMATE DEADLINES COLLIDE WITH POLITICS AS DEM-LED STATES CHASE BIG OIL IN COURT BUT SPARE LOCAL REFINERS
Wentz is the topline expert at the Climate Judiciary Project at the Environmental Law Institute — an entity currently under federal investigation, as Fox News Digital recently reported.
"The Committee on the Judiciary is investigating allegations of improper attempts by the Environmental Law Institute (ELI) and its Climate Judiciary Project (CJP) to influence federal judges," read a statement from House Judiciary Committee members Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, and Darrell Issa, R-Calif.
Jordan and Issa found evidence of efforts to "influence judges who potentially may be presiding over lawsuits related to alleged climate change claims… [which] appear to have the underlying goal of predisposing federal judges in favor of plaintiffs alleging injuries from the manufacturing, marketing, use, or sale of fossil-fuel products."
SCOOP: WHITE HOUSE BACKS IMPEACHING 'ROGUE' JUDGES ACCUSED OF PARTISAN RULINGS
A spokesperson for the institute told Fox News Digital at the time that CJP’s curriculum is "fact-based and science-first, grounded in consensus reports and developed with a robust peer review process" and that suggestions otherwise are "without merit."
Wentz, who is also a senior fellow at Columbia’s Sabin Center for Climate Law, is listed as chief author of the section, along with fellow university faculty Radley Horton, on page 1561.
She served as a witness for the plaintiffs in Juliana v. U.S., which youth activists brought accusing the U.S. government of violating their constitutional rights by failing to implement their preferred climate change policies.
She also signed an amicus brief supporting the Obama administration’s environmental regulations after multiple states filed lawsuits against the EPA in 2016. …
‘Shocking and inappropriate’: Legal experts slam judges’ guide over climate bias claims
Ask who never gets charged.
A gold-standard guide used by judges nationwide to address subjects they are not particularly versed in is drawing criticism over the latest edition’s inclusion of purported ideological bias focused on its climate section.
Critics have said the fourth edition of the Federal Judicial Center’s Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence – which includes a foreword by Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan – appears to blur the line between neutrally educating judges and indoctrinating them with left-wing advocates’ prose.
The approximately 1,600-page guide was released at the beginning of the year and includes several citations and footnotes to climate change activists and proponents, including climatologist Michael Mann and environmental law expert Jessica Wentz.
CLIMATE DEADLINES COLLIDE WITH POLITICS AS DEM-LED STATES CHASE BIG OIL IN COURT BUT SPARE LOCAL REFINERS
Wentz is the topline expert at the Climate Judiciary Project at the Environmental Law Institute — an entity currently under federal investigation, as Fox News Digital recently reported.
"The Committee on the Judiciary is investigating allegations of improper attempts by the Environmental Law Institute (ELI) and its Climate Judiciary Project (CJP) to influence federal judges," read a statement from House Judiciary Committee members Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, and Darrell Issa, R-Calif.
Jordan and Issa found evidence of efforts to "influence judges who potentially may be presiding over lawsuits related to alleged climate change claims… [which] appear to have the underlying goal of predisposing federal judges in favor of plaintiffs alleging injuries from the manufacturing, marketing, use, or sale of fossil-fuel products."
SCOOP: WHITE HOUSE BACKS IMPEACHING 'ROGUE' JUDGES ACCUSED OF PARTISAN RULINGS
A spokesperson for the institute told Fox News Digital at the time that CJP’s curriculum is "fact-based and science-first, grounded in consensus reports and developed with a robust peer review process" and that suggestions otherwise are "without merit."
Wentz, who is also a senior fellow at Columbia’s Sabin Center for Climate Law, is listed as chief author of the section, along with fellow university faculty Radley Horton, on page 1561.
She served as a witness for the plaintiffs in Juliana v. U.S., which youth activists brought accusing the U.S. government of violating their constitutional rights by failing to implement their preferred climate change policies.
She also signed an amicus brief supporting the Obama administration’s environmental regulations after multiple states filed lawsuits against the EPA in 2016. …
0 Comments
0 Shares
39 Views
0 Reviews
