First appeared on FOX: A new report by a US energy advocacy group warns that legal training programmes are “perversely influencing the courts, subverting the rule of law and feeding the climate cult”.
A new report released by the American Energy Institute (AEI) claims that the Environmental Law Institute’s Climate Justice Project (CJP) “falsely portrays itself as a neutral organization that educates judges about questionable climate science.”
The report also claims that CJP is a partner with a group of more than 20 plaintiffs who are suing to hold energy suppliers liable for damages due to the effects of climate change. To date, CJP has trained more than 2,000 state and federal judges, according to the report.
Jason Isaac, CEO of the American Energy Association, said the training program is “akin to meddling with an umpire before a match or a game.”
Hawaii’s big oil companies are ‘eyeballs’ in nationwide Green New Deal push, experts say
A natural gas flame burns near an oil pump jack at the New Harmony Oil Field in Grayville, Illinois, June 19, 2022. (Getty Images)
“You reach out to them, you share your views and you steer them in a certain direction,” Isaac said in an interview with Fox News Digital.
Nick Collins, a spokesman for the Environmental Law Institute (ELI), said the report was “full of misinformation.”
“The Climate Justice Project is a nonpartisan educational initiative that provides judges with a mainstream evidence-based, science-based curriculum. CJP does not take positions on individual cases, advocate for specific outcomes, participate in litigation, assist or coordinate litigants, or advise judges how to rule. ELI’s funders include individuals, foundations and organizations, from energy companies to government agencies to private philanthropies, but none of them dictate our work,” Collins said.
In recent years, several lawsuits have been brought to court targeting major oil companies, seeking to use pollution laws and other mechanisms to hold them responsible for damage caused by climate change.
One such case is currently before the US Supreme Court: In 2020, the city of Honolulu sued several major fossil fuel companies, including Exxon and Chevron, alleging that their products contribute to greenhouse gas emissions and global warming without warning consumers about the risks.
The energy companies appealed to the Hawaii Supreme Court, arguing that federal law prevents states from effectively setting statewide energy policy.
Republican state attorneys general ask Supreme Court to consider Hawaii climate change lawsuit, calling it a “serious threat”
An oil rig and supply ship are seen in the Gulf of Mexico, off the coast of Louisiana. (AP Photo/Gerald Herbert/File)
But the court ruled against the companies, and the case went to trial. The companies appealed again, this time to the Supreme Court, which indicated it would hear the case in June.
Hawaii Supreme Court Justice Mark E. Recktenwald quietly revealed in May that he had spoken at a course for the Climate Justice Project, which, according to the ELI, aims to educate judges around the country on how to handle climate change litigation.
“As climate litigation increases, judges will have to consider complex scientific and legal issues, many of which are rapidly evolving,” the CJP said on its website. “To address these issues, the Environmental Law Institute’s Climate Justice Project will collaborate with leading national judicial education institutions to meet judges’ needs for foundational knowledge of climate science methods and concepts.”
But AEI says the program is “an accomplice in this anti-democratic social engineering” through its influence over judges involved in the types of cases like the Hawaii lawsuit, and through its funding from “the same left-wing donors who fund climate change litigation.”
The report said the “educational materials” were “created by activist scholars who advise Plaintiffs and support their claims in legal briefs, and are filled with pro-Plaintiffs messaging, including fabricated ‘research’ for the litigation.”
The report also argued that “CJP conceals its ties to plaintiffs, so that judges seeking information in good faith may not know that CJP is an unreliable source of information,” and called on “relevant state authorities” to [to] “We will ensure that public resources are not used to support campaigns that undermine the rule of law and confidence in the courts.”
Republican governor slams Biden’s energy policies: ‘It’s just an attack on American energy’
In recent years, several lawsuits have been filed in court targeting major oil companies, seeking to use pollution laws and other mechanisms to hold them responsible for damages caused by climate change. One such case is currently before the U.S. Supreme Court. (Getty Images/File)
According to the AEI report, CJP has received “millions of dollars in funding to cover the legal costs of bringing the climate change lawsuits from the same activist groups that make grants to the Collective Action Fund, which in turn funnels money to the law firm leading the Hawaii litigation, Schar Edling LLP. According to its website, Schar Edling is the legal counsel for 24 climate change plaintiffs.
The United States Judicial Conference, which governs the U.S. judiciary, warned judges that they could be “improperly influenced” by the seminars.
“It is argued that this influence may be exerted through the content of the program, the contact between judges and those litigating before them, and the prerequisites offered to program participants,” the U.S. Judicial Conference said.
The AEI report alleges that CJP “conceals its affiliations with the plaintiffs because it knows that such relationships raise judicial ethics concerns.”
Click here to get the FOX News app
According to AEI, Sandra Nichols Thiam, ELI vice president and director of judicial education, acknowledged this in a 2023 press statement, saying, “We couldn’t do what we do if we looked or even smelled biased.”
“Taken together, it appears that the CJP disclosed as little information as possible in order to maintain the appearance of impartiality,” AEI said. “But their admissions confirm that the CJP exists to facilitate informal, one-sided contact between judges and environmental activists under the guise of judicial education. And secrecy is essential to their work, with their goal, as Thiam put it, to develop ‘laws that support environmental activism.'”
AEI, a group that describes itself as “dedicated to advancing policies that ensure America’s energy security and economic prosperity,” said the CJP’s activities are an “assault on the rule of law.”
“In the United States, those in power are not allowed to persuade or manipulate judges before their cases are heard,” the report states.
