Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond is one of 27 attorneys general calling for the Federal Judicial Center to immediately withdraw what they call an “inappropriate” new addition to scientific material used in dealing with climate science cases.
Led by West Virginia Attorney General JB McCuskey, the coalition wants a removal of the Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence. Members contend the newest edition was written by authors who are connected to university climate studies programs that promote legal warfare against States and energy producers to push their left leaning political agendas.
“The climate chapter of the latest edition of the Manual is absolutely biased and would tip the scales in favor of left-leaning policies that would be the final nail in the coffin of American-produced energy. We cannot allow that to happen. Domestic energy production is key to continued American prosperity and security,” stated McCuskey in announcing the request.
For decades, the Manual has been an important research tool for judges and attorneys. The U.S. Supreme Court has cited it to explain basic principles in math and science, and it has been cited in more than 1,700 opinions.
“Impartiality is a cornerstone of our judicial system. That’s why it is so important that a document that serves as the guidelines by which most, if not all, courts interpret the law be written with justice, honesty, and freedom from bias,” Attorney General McCuskey said.
The coalition reminds the Center that Article III “guarantees every litigant… the right to an independent and impartial tribunal.” This guarantee loses all meaning when the court system’s research office decides controversial questions before judges have ruled on them. If the Center can decide scientific questions in climate cases, it could easily decide other controversial questions for election disputes, Second Amendment cases and other matters.
Given that there are ongoing federal lawsuits trying to settle these exact issues—including before the Supreme Court—the attorneys general are asking the Center to withdraw this chapter and establish policies so that political agenda-driven guidelines are not included in future editions.
In their letter to the Judicial Center, Drummond and the 26 other attorneys general stated, “—the Fourth Edition places the judiciary firmly on one side of some of the most hotly disputed questions in current litigation: climate-related science and “attribution.” Such work undermines the judiciary’s
impartiality and places a thumb on one side of the scale. It does so even as these issues are pending before the Supreme Court and other parts of the federal judiciary.”
The letter pointed to two authors cited in the reference section, explaining that Jessica Wentz and Radley Horton are connected to climate studies programs at Columbia University, a university whose research partners “have long viewed lawsuits against States, traditional energy producers and others as “opportunities” to “resolve” what they see as “the pressing dangers created by climate change.””
Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah and Wyoming joined West Virginia in the letter.
Read the letter here.