Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan is facing criticism from a group of conservative legal organizations for not stepping down from an important climate change case that the high court is set to address. There’s also a push for the Senate Judiciary Committee to look into her public endorsement of a legal theory at the heart of the controversy.
A letter was sent on Monday to leaders of the Senate Judiciary Committee, requesting an investigation into whether Kagan violated federal ethics rules by participating in a key legal case involving Suncor Energy and Boulder County.
The coalition believes Kagan’s fairness was compromised because she authored a preface for the Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence, which included a climate science chapter that was later criticized as biased and removed after pushback from Congress and various Republican attorneys general.
The case of Suncor Energy v. Boulder County questions if local governments in Colorado can utilize state law to hold oil and gas companies accountable for their contributions to climate change.
Kagan’s preface suggested that judges would frequently deal with cases related to “climate science,” and she encouraged them to refer to the manual when assessing scientific evidence. The coalition asserts that her remarks and endorsement indicate she may have already aligned herself with the legal arguments being made by the plaintiffs.
According to Carrie Severino, president of the Judicial Crisis Network, Kagan’s involvement in climate change litigation hinders her from serving as an impartial judge. She noted that Kagan’s support for the reference manual, which presented a one-sided narrative on climate science, signifies an endorsement of partisan ideals that underpin state and local climate laws. The chapter’s bias was deemed so severe that it was removed after political scrutiny.
The letter asserts that Kagan’s previous judicial decisions show a lack of consistency in her denials of conflicts of interest. For instance, she was involved in the landmark Affordable Care Act case despite previously serving as attorney general under the Obama administration when the law was being defended.
The coalition is urging the Senate Judiciary Committee to hold a hearing to examine Kagan’s compliance with ethics laws and the Supreme Court’s conduct standards. They argue that maintaining public trust in the judiciary is dependent on judges withdrawing from cases where their neutrality might be questioned.
This move comes in light of heightened scrutiny of Supreme Court ethics, particularly regarding Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito amidst reports of undisclosed luxury travel and gifts. Though the Senate Judiciary Committee investigated these matters, it didn’t result in any impeachment actions.
The timing of this letter is notable as Kagan is expected to testify alongside Justice Amy Coney Barrett before the House Appropriations Committee about the Supreme Court’s budget proposal. Such public appearances by sitting justices are relatively rare.
The Supreme Court’s Office of Public Affairs did not respond to requests for comment on the matter.
