logo
Unearthed chat sheds light on cozy ties between judges, climate activists, raising ethical concerns

Unearthed chat sheds light on cozy ties between judges, climate activists, raising ethical concerns

Fox News3 days ago
Print Close
By Emma Colton, Breanne Deppisch
Published July 17, 2025
EXCLUSIVE: An environmental advocacy group accused of trying to manipulate judges organized a years-long, nationwide online forum with jurists to promote favorable info and litigation updates regarding climate issues – until the email-styled group chat was abruptly made private, Fox News Digital found.
The Climate Judiciary Project (CJP) was founded in 2018 by a left-wing environmental nonprofit, the Environmental Law Institute (ELI), and pitches itself as a "first-of-its-kind effort" that "provides judges with authoritative, objective, and trusted education on climate science, the impacts of climate change, and the ways climate science is arising in the law."
But critics, such as Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, say CJP is funded by China and left-wing activists for one purpose.
"They fund CJP to train judges," Cruz said during a June hearing. "So, quote, unquote, train in climate science and make them agreeable to creative climate litigation tactics. Then, these left-wing bankrollers turn around and fund the climate litigators who will bring these bogus cases before those same judges that they've just indoctrinated.
"This is like paying the players to play and paying the umpire to call the shots the way you want."
The group, however, says it provides "neutral, objective information to the judiciary about the science of climate change as it is understood by the expert scientific community and relevant to current and future litigation."
SUPREME COURT LIMITS JUDGES' AUTHORITY TO BLOCK INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS OVER ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS
One of the efforts CJP launched included rolling out an email-styled listserv by which leaders from the Climate Judiciary Project could message directly with judges, documents obtained by Fox News Digital show. The listserv was launched in September 2022 and maintained until May 2024, according to the documents. A portal website page for the forum was previously publicly available, with an archived link saved in July 2024 showing there were 29 members in the group.
"Judicial Leaders in Climate Science," the archived website link reviewed by Fox Digital reads, accompanied by a short description that the group was a "Forum for Judicial Leaders in Climate Science to share resources."
A link to the forum now leads to an error warning, stating, "Sorry, but that group does not exist."
Fox News Digital obtained the archived chat history of the forum, which detailed numerous messages between at least five judges and CJP employees trading links on climate studies, congratulating one another on hosting recent environmental events, sharing updates on recent climate cases that were remanded to state courts, and encouraging each other to participate in other CJP meet-ups.
One message posted by Delaware Judge Travis Laster, vice chancellor of the Delaware Court of Chancery, features a YouTube video of a 2022 climate presentation delivered by a Delaware official and a Columbia University professor that focused on the onslaught of climate lawsuits since the mid-2000s. It also included claims that such lawsuits could one day bankrupt the fuel industry.
Laster shared the video in the group with a disclaimer to others: "Please do not forward or use without checking with me" as the video is "unlisted" on YouTube and not publicly available.
A handful of other judges responded to Laster's video and message, praising it as "great work."
SENATORS SOUND OFF AS SUPREME COURT HEARS CASE ON NATIONWIDE INJUNCTIONS
"This is great work/great stuff, Travis; congrats on a job well-done, & thank you so much for sharing this!," Indiana Court of Appeals Judge Stephen Scheele responded, according to documents obtained by Fox News Digital.
Another judge in a Nebraska county court added that he had not watched the video yet but said the state court administrator's office was interested in a similar program focused on "litigation and climate change." The Nebraska judge said he "may need to lean on all of you for guidance and direction."
The judges' correspondence on the forum included their typical email signatures, showcasing their job titles as "judge" as well as which court they preside over.
The climate activists also posted messages directed to the judges on the listserv, Fox News Digital found, including a science and policy analyst at the Environmental Law Institute posting a lengthy message on Nov. 15, 2023. The message encouraged judges and climate activists alike to review the government's publication of the Fifth National Climate Assessment that year, which the environmental crusader said contained "good news and bad news."
"The bad news is that the impacts of climate change are being felt throughout all regions of the United States, and these impacts are expected to worsen with every fraction of a degree of additional warming. The report finds that climate change will continue to affect our nation's health, food security, water supply, and economy," the message read.
CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS ADDRESSES DIVISIONS BETWEEN JUSTICES AFTER SEVERAL RECENT SCOTUS SKIRMISHES
"The good news is that the report also notes that it isn't too late for us to act," the message continued, before encouraging the 28 other members of the group to go over CJP's climate curricula, such as "Climate Science 101" and "Climate Litigation 101," and send over any feedback.
"As you know, our Climate Judiciary Project exists to be as beneficial to judges as possible, so any insights you might have for us would be very helpful!" the message added when asking members to review the curricula.
In another message, CJP's manager, Jared Mummert, sent a message to the group in May 2024 praising the judges for their mentorship of a second group of "Judicial Leaders in Climate Science" – which included 14 judges from 12 states and Puerto Rico – as part of a partnership between CJP and the National Judicial College. The National Judicial College provides judicial training for judges across the country from its Reno, Nevada, campus.
"We want to give a special 'thank you' to those who are serving as mentors to this second cohort!" the message read. It added that CJP was ramping up its number of "engagement opportunities" to "every six months for both cohorts of judges to come together to share updates and connect with one another."
Fox News Digital reached out to five of the judges on the listserv for comment, four of whom did not respond.
Scheele's office told Fox News Digital on Thursday that he first joined the 2022 National Judicial Conference on Climate Science, more than two years before he was appointed to the Court of Appeals of Indiana, after another delegate was unable to attend.
"At the last minute, when another appointed delegate was unexpectedly unable to attend, Judge Scheele was asked by Indiana's state court administration to fill in as Indiana's representative, and he accepted the invitation. As is normal in conferences attended by our judges, this conference addressed emerging, hot button issues that might come before the courts," Scheele's office said.
It added: "Judge Scheele does not recall any substantive communication on the 'listserv' mentioned. He, like all of our Court of Appeals of Indiana judges, is dedicated to the unbiased, apolitical administration of justice in the State. He, like all of our judges, educates himself on emergent topics in the law and applies his legal training to evaluate the legal issues before him."
CJP, for its part, said the now-defunct email list was created in September 2022 to help members of its Judicial Leaders in Climate Science program communicate and network with one another for the duration of the program.
The one-year program, established by CJP in coordination with the National Judicial College, "trains state court judges on judicial leadership skills integrated with consensus climate science and how it is arising in the law," the group told Fox News Digital.
Judges quietly working behind the scenes with climate and environmental activists have drawn criticism from conservative lawmakers in recent years as climate-focused suits increased, including those who have accused CJP of manipulating the justice system.
Cruz, for example, has been at the forefront of condemning CJP for joining forces with the National Judicial College. Cruz argued in a 2024 opinion piece that he is "concerned that this collaboration means court staff are helping far-left climate activists lobby and direct judges behind closed doors."
DOJ SUES FOUR BLUE STATES OVER 'UNCONSTITUTIONAL' CLIMATE LAWS THREATENING US ENERGY SECURITY
Cruz again railed against CJP during a Senate subcommittee hearing in June, called "Enter the Dragon – China and the Left's Lawfare Against American Energy Dominance," where the Texas Republican argued there is a "systematic campaign" launched by the Chinese Communist Party and American left-wing activists to weaponize the court systems to "undermine American energy dominance." CJP, Cruz said, is a pivotal player in the "lawfare" as it works to secure "judicial capture."
Cruz said CJP's claims of neutrality are bluster, and the group instead allegedly promotes "ex parte indoctrination, pressuring judges to set aside the rule of law, and rule instead according to a predetermined political narrative."
Judges have previously landed in hot water over climate-related issues in group forums, including in 2019, when a federal judge hit "reply all" to an email chain with 45 other judges and court staff regarding an invitation to a climate seminar for judges hosted by the Environmental Law Institute. The judge was subsequently chastised by colleagues for sharing "this nonsense" and suggested it was an ethics violation, while others defended that flagging the event to others was not unethical.
Fox News Digital spoke with Heritage Foundation senior legal fellow Zack Smith, who explained there has been an overarching increase in courts promoting trainings for judges on issues they would eventually be asked to preside over impartially, pointing to the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts' DEI trainings for judges during the Biden era. The office works as the administrative agency for the U.S. court system, handling issues from finances to tech support.
TOP ENERGY GROUP DEMANDS GOVERNOR TAKE SWIFT ACTION AGAINST RADICAL 'EXTREMISTS' CRIPPLING POWER GRID
"There's a problem right now with many courts putting forward, seeming to take sides on issues they will be asked to address through the trainings that they're putting forward. And this was a particular problem with the DEI trainings that different federal district courts were putting on, that the Administrative Office of U.S. courts were sponsoring. It appeared that the judiciary itself was encouraging violations of the Constitution, violations of federal law, and most problematically was taking sides in issues they would eventually be asked to sit and preside over impartially," he said.
Justice Department officials did not respond to Fox News Digital's requests for comment on the CJP program in question, or other efforts to educate judges more directly on climate issues.
Still, news of the program's outreach comes as the U.S. has seen a sharp uptick in climate-related lawsuits in recent years, including cases targeting oil majors Shell, BP and ExxonMobil for allegedly engaging in "deceptive" marketing practices and downplaying the risks of climate change, as well as lawsuits bought against state governments and U.S. agencies, including the Interior Department, for failing to adequately address risks from pollution or adequately protect against the harm caused by climate change, according to plaintiffs who filed the suits.
DARK MONEY FUND POURED MILLIONS OF DOLLARS INTO ECO ACTIVIST GROUPS BLOCKING HIGHWAYS, DESTROYING FAMOUS ART
CJP's educational events are done "in partnership with leading national judicial education institutions and state judicial authorities, in accordance with their accepted standards," a spokesperson for the group said in an emailed statement. "Its curriculum is fact-based and science-first, grounded in consensus reports and developed with a robust peer review process that meets the highest scholarly standards."
"CJP's work is no different than the work of other continuing judicial education organizations that address important complex topics, including medicine, tech and neuroscience," this person added.
The number of climate-related lawsuits in the U.S. has increased significantly in recent years, including during the last two years of the Biden administration. To some extent, the educational efforts led by CJP appear to have been enacted in earnest to address real questions or concerns judges might have in presiding over these cases for the first time – many of which seek tens of millions of dollars in damages.
The Supreme Court agreed earlier this month to grant a request from ExxonMobil and Chevron to transfer two Louisiana lawsuits from state to federal court.
While the move itself is not immediately significant, it will be closely watched by oil and gas majors, as they look to navigate the complex landscape of environmental lawsuits, including lawsuits filed by state and local governments. Oil majors typically prefer to have their cases heard by federal courts, which are seen as more sympathetic to their interests.
CLIMATE JUSTICE GROUP HAS DEEP TIES TO JUDGES, EXPERTS INVOLVED IN LITIGATION AMID CLAIMS OF IMPARTIALITY
Since Trump's re-election in 2024, the cases appeared to have died down, at least to an extent. U.S. appeals courts have declined to take up many challenges filed on behalf of plaintiffs in several states who have sued claiming government inaction and failure to act to protect against known harms from fossil fuel extraction and production in the U.S.
CJP's program is run by ELI in partnership with the Federal Judicial Center, the latter of which bills itself as the "research and education center" for judges across the country.
Their work includes partnerships with myriad outside groups beyond the CJP aimed at informing and educating judges on a range of issues, including neuroscience and bioscience, constitutional law, and bankruptcy, among other things.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
According to their website , the effort is important to help judges understand relevant case law and ethics, sentencing guidelines, and other types of issue-specific programs they might be encountering for the first time.
Fox News Digital has previously reported on CJP's cozy relationship with judges, including when the group's president, Jordan Diamond, detailed in a Wall Street Journal letter to the editor in September that the group "doesn't participate in litigation, support or coordinate with any parties in litigation, or advise judges on how they should rule in any case."
A subsequent Fox News Digital review published in December found that several CJP expert lawyers and judges continued to have close ties to the curriculum and are deeply involved in climate litigation, including tapping insight from university professors who have also filed several climate-related amicus briefs.
"CJP doesn't participate in litigation, support or coordinate with any parties in litigation, or advise judges on how they should rule in any case," an ELI spokesperson defended in a comment to Fox News Digital in December. "Our courses provide judges with access to evidence-based information about climate science and trends in the law."
Fox News Digital's Andrew Mark Miller contributed to this piece. Print Close
URL
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/judges-climate-activists-private-forum-exposed
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Pete Hegseth's Senior Advisor Justin Fulcher Resigns from the Pentagon After 6 Months
Pete Hegseth's Senior Advisor Justin Fulcher Resigns from the Pentagon After 6 Months

Yahoo

time26 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Pete Hegseth's Senior Advisor Justin Fulcher Resigns from the Pentagon After 6 Months

"We wish him well in his future endeavors," Chief Pentagon Spokesman Sean Parnell said in a statementNEED TO KNOW Justin Fulcher, who served as a senior advisor to Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, has departed from the Pentagon after six months "This is just the beginning," he wrote in a statement on X Fulcher made headlines in April when he allegedly accused a colleague of calling the Pentagon police on himJustin Fulcher, who served as a senior advisor to Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, has departed from the Pentagon after six months. Fulcher announced his exit in a statement shared on X on Saturday, July 19. "As planned, I've completed 6 months of service in government to my country," he wrote. "Working alongside the dedicated men and women of the Department of Defense has been incredibly inspiring," Fulcher continued. Reflecting on his time in office, the former aide said, "Revitalizing the warrior ethos, rebuilding the military, and reestablishing deterrence are just some of the historic accomplishments I'm proud to have witnessed. Still, this is just the beginning." Fulcher then expressed his gratitude to Hegseth for his "decisive leadership" and to President Donald Trump for his "continued confidence in our team." "I'm grateful to both, and to the extraordinary civilians and service members who turn vision into action every day," Fulcher wrote, then adding that he will continue to support "all future endeavors" of the Department of Defense. In a statement shared with PEOPLE, Chief Pentagon Spokesman Sean Parnell said, "The Department of Defense is grateful to Justin Fulcher for his work on behalf of President Trump and Secretary Hegseth. We wish him well in his future endeavors." Fulcher previously worked in the Department of Defense as part of Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency, according to CBS News. Three sources claimed to the outlet that Fulcher was "ousted" from the department. Hegseth's office has lost three other staff members this year alone, including senior adviser Dan Caldwell and deputy chief of staff Dan Selnick, who were both fired, and chief of staff Joe Kasper, who transitioned into a new role, per CBS News. Fulcher made headlines in April when he allegedly accused a colleague of calling the Pentagon police on him, The Independent reported. Never miss a story — sign up for to stay up-to-date on the best of what PEOPLE has to offer​​, from celebrity news to compelling human interest stories. Speaking with Fox Digital, Fulcher said he resigned on Thursday, July 17. Hegseth, a former Fox News host, was confirmed as the Secretary of Defense in January. His nomination in November 2024 was controversial given his sexual assault allegation from 2017. Read the original article on People Solve the daily Crossword

Transcript: Rep. Jim Himes on "Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan," July 20, 2025
Transcript: Rep. Jim Himes on "Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan," July 20, 2025

Yahoo

time26 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Transcript: Rep. Jim Himes on "Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan," July 20, 2025

The following is the transcript of an interview with Rep. Jim Himes, Democrat of Connecticut, that aired on "Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan" on July 20, 2025. MARGARET BRENNAN: We turn now to the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, Representative Jim Himes. He joins us from Connecticut. Good morning to you. Congressman, you are on the Financial Services Committee, so let's pick up right there. The Supreme Court indicated that the President of the United States does not have the authority to fire the Fed Chair unless there is cause. It sounds like the White House is trying to build a case that they have cause. If they go ahead with it, what happens? CONGRESSMAN JIM HIMES: Yeah, well, you know, Margaret, the last question you asked the Secretary, shows what a con man he is. And I just listened to his whole thing. And, you know, if you're over the age of five, you've dealt with hucksters and con men. Everything is going to be great in two weeks. By August 1st, we're going to have a deal. The American people are going to be so happy. Complete failure to understand the facts, right? He said that tariffs are paid by foreign countries. Tariffs are not paid by foreign countries. He said, Jay Powell is torturing the American people. Margaret, you didn't have the time, but if you'd had a minute, you would have said, wait a minute. There's a Federal Open Market Committee that is comprised of seven Fed governors, and all of the heads of the central bank offices around the country. That committee, comprised of people who have been appointed by Democratic and Republican Presidents, set the interest rates, right? So, this notion that Jay Powell is unilaterally stopping a decline in interest rates, which, by the way, in the of- in the face- for those of those folks who know a little bit about economics, in the face of up-ticking inflation, which we're seeing, would be absolutely bananas. So, what you just saw was a master class by a huckster and a con man who uses words like torture that are very, very dangerous words, not just for the economy, but for the physical safety of people like Jay Powell. MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, just to be clear, that's why I said it's not the Chairman's unilateral decision for exactly the reason you raised, that there is a committee that makes the decision. The inflation rate for the CPI was 2.7% if you strip out food- energy and food, which is more volatile, it's up two-tenths of a percent. So, that economic data is what we are pointing to there, not opinion on pricing. But, is there congressional pushback that can be done? I mean, what happens if there's a tweet that says the Fed chair is gone? REP. HIMES: Well, interestingly, inside the White House, and I don't know who it is, my guess is it's maybe the Treasury Secretary is saying, and this is a very difficult thing to say to a person like Donald Trump, that if you fire the Fed chair, either illegally, which they're happy to do, or because you trump up some baloney-like-charge associated with a renovation of the headquarters, there is going to be a massive market reaction, because you cannot lie to the capital markets. We saw this the day after Liberation Day, before we all were familiarized with the TACO trade. The day after liberation day, the stock and the bond markets took a nosedive. So, my guess is that somebody is saying to the president because he doesn't care if he follows the law or not, and the law is very clear that he can't fire the Fed chair. But somebody is saying to the President, the economic instability that gets caused when the cornerstone of the global economy and capital markets all of the sudden has a politically driven interest rate policy. I think that's the one thing that's holding them off. MARGARET BRENNAN: Congressman, we're going to take a quick break and continue our conversation on a variety of topics. We need to bring up with you on the other side of it, stay with us. [COMMERCIAL BREAK] MARGARET BRENNAN: Welcome back to Face the Nation. We are continuing our conversation now with Connecticut Congressman Jim Himes, who is the ranking member on the Intelligence Committee. Congressman, I want to pick up on that topic. Just a statement of fact here: A bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee investigation found that the US intelligence community assessment of Russian interference in the 2016 election was correct. They deemed it to be so on a bipartisan basis. I'm saying that because today and yesterday, the director of the intelligence community, Tulsi Gabbard, has said that she is referring for prosecution former American officials she accused of treasonous conspiracy, a years-long coup against President Trump, because they assessed Russia had tried to influence the election. This is weeks after the CIA Director issued a report critiquing the tradecraft that went into that 2016 assessment. Is there any legal basis for any kind of prosecution here? REP. HIMES: None, absolutely none. Margaret, what you saw from the Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, was not just a lie, but a very dangerous lie, because when you start throwing around language like sedition and treason, somebody is going to get hurt. Now, you pointed out that the Senate committee, then led by Marco Rubio, a Republican and now Secretary of State, found unanimously that Russia meddled in the election to try to assist Donald Trump. John Durham, special counsel appointed by Donald Trump, investigated this, found that the Senate report was correct. Now, what Tulsi is doing it's a little sleight of hand, but it's worth focusing on. She is saying that the Intelligence Committee, early on, said that the Russians could not use cyber tools to mess with the voting infrastructure, the machines that tally our votes. And that was true then, and it is true now, though the Russians tried to break into a couple of states, you know, election technical infrastructure. They didn't do it, but it is well known and well established that the Russians hacked into the DNC and undertook any number of other influence operations, including buying reams of Facebook ads to discredit Hillary Clinton. That is not in contention, right? And what is horrifying about this whole lie out of Gabbard is, number one, it puts people at risk. And right now, you know, the mouth-breathers on MAGA online are just going out of their minds based on a lie. And number two, the intelligence community is full of very, good people who do their jobs every single day, and now they're watching their leader do something that each and every one of them knows is dishonest and it is a really, really bad thing for the safety and security of the American people when that dynamic is- is out there. MARGARET BRENNAN: That Senate report is online, the findings are there, but I understand your distinction there, and it's an important one in influence versus physical hacking. You're-- REP. HIMES: -- By- by the way Margaret, if I may- if I may, you asked about the referral. Here's the test. This is Epstein all over again. Criminal referrals. We're going to prosecute Barack Obama, you know, treasonous and seditious. Here's the thing, and I hope that 4, 5, 6, weeks from now- don't take it from this Democrat. 4,5,6, weeks from now, let's see if this administration, Tulsi Gabbard, accusing a former president of treason. Let's see if they bring charges. They won't. They won't, because there's not a judge in the land, not a single judge who will treat this with anything other than laughter that will be heard from the Atlantic to the Pacific in this country. So the test of this is 4,5,6 weeks from now, is the DOJ bringing charges? And the answer to that is no. And now we're going to be in Epstein world. We're like, wait a minute, treasonous conspiracy by a former president. Why isn't the Department of Justice bringing charges? And the answer to that question is that it is a lie. MARGARET BRENNAN: Understood. On the other topic, I want to ask you about as a Democrat, the New York Times-- the DNC-- is reporting the DNC examination of what went wrong in the last election is going to steer clear of the decisions made by the Biden turned Harris campaign. You were very direct early on in calling for then President Biden to drop out of this race. You don't parse your words normally. Do you actually think it is possible for your party to self-diagnose problems without looking at the presidential race itself in terms of the candidates? REP. HIMES: Look, we need to acknowledge and every- and all of America saw it on the night of that disastrous debate in the July before the election that Joe Biden was not going to win the election. That was not just evident in the debate. It was evident in the polling that his people were keeping from him. Okay, so that is a fact. Now, Democrats are a big tent party. We go from Joe Manchin, who's practically a Republican, to AOC who is a Democratic socialist. So, we always have a struggle in coming up with sort of one set of policies, one set of messaging, and it's particularly hard to do when we don't have a presidential candidate. You know, a presidential candidate, of course, attracts the attention, is sort of the one person who must run nationwide and speak for the party as a whole. Right now, we're having a lot of conversations with a lot of different views, and I understand that's enormously frustrating to Democrats who are so upset over the result of the election. But you know, other than fight back with the tools that we have right now, we've got to be introspective about what we have done wrong that resulted in a dramatic win by Donald Trump in 2020*. There's an awful lot of rage in the Democratic Party, and my message to my Democratic friends is fine. I get the rage, believe me. I was in the chamber on January 6, 2021, and worried for my own life. But the thing to do right now is to be introspective and ask yourself, what can we do better to appeal to more people, including those people that we have lost time and time again in elections. MARGARET BRENNAN: 15 months out from the midterm races. Congressman Jim Himes, thank you. We'll be right back. *President Donald Trump won the 2024 election. Former President Biden won the 2020 election. A new you: The science of redesigning your personality Would you go on a retirement cruise? ICE head Todd Lyons says agents will arrest anyone in U.S. illegally, not just criminals

These Hampton Roads candidates raised the most money in House of Delegates races
These Hampton Roads candidates raised the most money in House of Delegates races

Yahoo

time26 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

These Hampton Roads candidates raised the most money in House of Delegates races

Four out of the top five biggest fundraisers for House of Delegates races in Hampton Roads are Democrats. All 100 seats are up for election in the fall, and Democrats have fielded candidates in each race. Republicans have candidates in 83 races. Top fundraising Democrats in the region include House Speaker Don Scott of Portsmouth, who raised about $3.4 million; Del. Jeion Ward of Hampton, who raised $394,000; Del. Michael Feggans of Virginia Beach, who raised $378,423; and Jessica Anderson, a Democratic candidate for District 71, who raised $357,000, according to the Virginia Public Access Project, which consolidated numbers from campaign finance filings made last week. Republican Del. Barry Knight, who represents Virginia Beach, rounded out the top five candidates, raising about $312,000. In Hampton Roads, House candidates who have raised top dollar amounts received funding from groups such as utility company Dominion Energy, developer Comstock Hospitality Holdings and Virginia Trial Lawyers PAC. Much of Scott's funding came from large donations, categorized for General Assembly races as over $1,000. In addition to $125,000 from Dominion, he received $35,000 from East Coast Amusements, which sells arcade machines, and $30,000 from PPE Resort Casino Petersburg. Dominion gave $25,000 to Ward, but also to Republican candidates in other districts. Donations include $20,000 to Knight, $15,000 to Del. Amanda Batten of James City and $7,500 to Del. Anne Tata of Virginia Beach. VPAP characterizes Scott's and Ward's districts as strongly Democratic — Scott doesn't have a Republican challenger, and Ward opponent John Chapman has so far raised a little more than $800. Each has donated to other campaigns. Scott's PAC is the fourth largest donor in Virginia, contributing more than $2.2 million to other campaigns. Most of that money went to the House Democratic Caucus, but the campaign has also given smaller amounts to individual candidates such as Del. Patrick Hope of Arlington, who received $25,000. Scott's campaign also has supported down-ballot races in Hampton Roads. Matthew Hamel and Stephanie Morales each received $10,000 for their campaigns for commonwealth's attorney of Chesapeake and Portsmouth, respectively. Ward's PAC donated $150,000 to the House Democratic Caucus. Knight is in a similar boat in a strongly Republican district, having raised about $312,000 to opponent Cheryl Smith's $12,500. Knight's PAC donated $41,000 to other Republican campaigns between 2024 and now, with $21,000 going to the Republican Commonwealth Leadership PAC and $5,000 to Del. Chad Green, who represents parts of Gloucester and James City County. He also donated $5,000 to Felisha Storm, who is challenging Del. Nadarius Clark in District 84. Districts 71, 86, 89 and 91 are considered competitive by VPAP, with no clear party favorite. Democrats have so far raised more money in those districts. In District 71, Anderson has outpaced Batten, raising about $357,000 to the Republican incumbent's $306,000. Likewise, Democrat Virgil Thornton raised about $150,000 to Republican incumbent AC Cordoza's $106,000 in District 86, which includes parts of Hampton and York. In Virginia Beach's District 97, Feggans has raised $378,000 to Republican challenger Tim Anderson's $241,000. District 89 is up for grabs after Republican Del. Baxter Ennis announced his retirement this year. Democrat Karen Carnegie and Republican Mike Lamonea, are in a tight fundraising race, with Carnegie raising $205,000 to Lamonea's $195,000. Both won primary elections in June to secure their party's nomination. Democrats running for statewide office are outpacing Republicans in two of three races. Democratic gubernatorial nominee Abigail Spanberger has raised $27.1 million to her opponent Lt. Gov. Winsome Earle-Sears's $11.6 million. Democrat Ghazala Hashmi, a state senator, has raised $3.5 million in her campaign for lieutenant governor. Her Republican opponent, conservative radio host John Reid, has raised about $441,000. Breaking the trend, incumbent Republican Attorney General Jason Miyares has raised $9.4 million to Democratic nominee Jay Jones' $4.9 million. Both are from Hampton Roads — Miyares from Virginia Beach; Jones from Norfolk. Kate Seltzer, 757-713-7881,

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store