logo
Unearthed chats shed light on cozy ties between judges, climate activists

Unearthed chats shed light on cozy ties between judges, climate activists

Fox Newsa day ago
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."
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."
"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.
"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."
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.
"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.
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.
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.
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.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Did money or politics cause Colbert cancellation? Either way, the economics are tough for TV
Did money or politics cause Colbert cancellation? Either way, the economics are tough for TV

Yahoo

time22 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Did money or politics cause Colbert cancellation? Either way, the economics are tough for TV

CBS says its decision to end Stephen Colbert's late-night comedy show is financial, not political. Yet even with the ample skepticism about that explanation, there's no denying the economics were not working in Colbert's favor. The network's bombshell announcement late Thursday that the 'Late Show' will end next May takes away President Donald Trump's most prominent TV critic and the most popular entertainment program in its genre. The television industry's declining economic health means similar hard calls are already being made with personalities and programming, with others to be faced in the future. For the late-night genre, there are unique factors to consider. As recently as 2018, broadcast networks took in an estimated $439 million in advertising revenue for its late-night programs, according to the advertising firm Guidelines. Last year, that number dwindled to $220 million. Once a draw for young men, now they've turned away Late-night TV was a particular draw for young men, considered the hardest-to-get and most valuable demographic for advertisers. Increasingly, these viewers are turning to streaming services, either to watch something else entirely or catch highlights of the late-night shows, which are more difficult for the networks to monetize. More broadly, the much-predicted takeover of viewers by streaming services is coming to pass. The Nielsen company reported that during the last two months, for the first time ever, more people consumed programming on services like YouTube and Netflix than on ABC, CBS and NBC or any cable network. Networks and streamers spent roughly $70 billion on entertainment shows and $30 billion for sports rights last year, said Brian Wieser, CEO of Madison & Wall, an advertising consultant and data services firm. Live sports is the most dependable magnet for viewers and costs for its rights are expected to increase 8% a year over the next decade. With television viewership declining in general, it's clear where savings will have to come from. Wieser said he does not know whether Colbert's show is profitable or not for CBS and parent company Paramount Global, but he knows the direction in which it is headed. 'The economics of television are weak,' he said. In a statement announcing the cancellation, George Cheeks, Paramount Global's president and chief executive officer, said that 'This is purely a financial decision against a challenging backdrop in late night. It is not related in any way to the show's performance, content or other matters happening at Paramount.' Cheeks' problem is that not everyone believes him. Colbert is a relentless critic of Trump, and earlier this week pointedly criticized Paramount's decision to settle Trump's lawsuit against CBS over a '60 Minutes' interview with Kamala Harris. He called Paramount's $16 million payment to Trump a 'big fat bribe,' since the company is seeking the administration's approval of its merger with Skydance Media. On Friday, the Writers Guild of America called for an investigation by New York's attorney general into whether Colbert's cancellation is itself a bribe, 'sacrificing free speech to curry favor with the Trump administration as the company looks for merger approval.' CBS' decision made this a pivotal week for the future of television and radio programming. Congress stripped federal funding for PBS and NPR, threatening the future of shows on those outlets. Journey Gunderson, executive director of the National Comedy Center, called the decision to end Colbert's show the end of an era. 'Late-night television has historically been one of comedy's most audience-accessible platforms — a place where commentary meets community, night after night,' Gunderson said. 'This isn't just the end of a show. It's the quiet removal of one of the few remaining platforms for daily comedic commentary. Trump celebrates Colbert's demise Trump, who has called in the past for CBS to terminate Colbert's contract, celebrated the show's upcoming demise. 'I absolutely love that Colbert got fired,' the president wrote on Truth Social. 'His talent was even less than his ratings.' Some experts questioned whether CBS could have explored other ways to save money on Colbert. NBC, for example, has cut costs by eliminating the band on Seth Meyers' late-night show and curtailing Jimmy Fallon's 'Tonight' show to four nights a week. Could CBS have saved more money by cutting off the show immediately, instead of letting it run until next May, which sets up an awkward 'lame duck' period? Then again, Colbert will keep working until his contract runs out; CBS would have had to keep paying him anyway. CBS recently cancelled the 'After Midnight' show that ran after Colbert. But the network had signaled earlier this year that it was prepared to continue that show until host Taylor Tomlinson decided that she wanted to leave, noted Bill Carter, author of 'The Late Shift.' 'It is a very sad day for CBS that they are getting out of the late-night race,' Andy Cohen, host of Bravo's 'Watch What Happens Live," told The Associated Press. 'I mean, they are turning off the lights after the news.' Colbert, if he wanted to continue past next May, would likely be able to find a streaming service willing to pay him, Wieser said. But the future of late-night comedy on the entertainment networks is genuinely at risk. Trump, in fact, may outlast his fiercest comic critics. Jon Stewart, once a weeknight fixture, works one night a week at 'The Daily Show' for Paramount's Comedy Central, a network that seldom produces much original programming any more. ABC's Jimmy Kimmel, who was chided on social media by Trump on Friday — 'I hear Jimmy Kimmel is next' — has a contract that also runs out next year. Kimmel, 57, openly wondered in a Variety interview before signing his latest three-year contract extension how long he wanted to do it. He's hosted his show since 2003. 'I have moments where I go, I cannot do this anymore,' Kimmel told Variety in 2022. 'And I have moments where I go, what am I gonna do with my life if I'm not doing this anymore?' It's a very complicated thing ... I'm not going to do this forever.' Colbert, Kimmel and Stewart were all nominated for Emmy awards this week. ___ AP journalist Liam McEwan in Los Angeles contributed to this report. David Bauder writes about the intersection of media and entertainment for the AP. Follow him at and David Bauder, The Associated Press

White House Wants Bias-Free AI for Government Work
White House Wants Bias-Free AI for Government Work

Yahoo

time22 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

White House Wants Bias-Free AI for Government Work

The White House is cooking up an order to make sure AI tools that work with the government stay politically neutral. Officials worry models trained on internet data can drift into liberal or conservative slants, so this would set a clear standard. Warning! GuruFocus has detected 3 Warning Sign with UAL. At the center of the plan is AI czar David Sacks, who has pointed to embarrassing moments like Google's Gemini painting a black George Washington or diverse Nazis. OpenAI, Anthropic, Google (NASDAQ:GOOG) and Elon Musk's xAI fear it could pick industry winners and spark free speech fights. This order lands just as the Pentagon is handing out nearly two hundred million dollars in AI contracts. Tying neutrality to federal deals could shift who wins big and shape how the industry builds its next generation of tools. It also comes bundled with moves to boost chip exports and speed data center approvals. As Washington juggles bias concerns and tech rivalry with China, investors will be watching every step. This article first appeared on GuruFocus. Sign in to access your portfolio

Justice Department asks court to unseal Jeffrey Epstein grand jury records
Justice Department asks court to unseal Jeffrey Epstein grand jury records

Yahoo

time22 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Justice Department asks court to unseal Jeffrey Epstein grand jury records

The Justice Department has asked a federal court to unseal grand jury transcripts in Jeffrey Epstein's case amid a firestorm over the Trump administration's handling of records related to the wealthy financier. Deputy attorney general Todd Blanche filed a motion urging the court to release the transcripts a day after President Donald Trump directed the Justice Department to do so. The Trump administration has been embroiled in controversy since the Justice Department last week announced that it would not be releasing any more evidence in its possession from Epstein's investigation. Mr Trump's demand to release the grand jury transcripts came after The Wall Street Journal reported on a sexually suggestive letter that the newspaper says bore Mr Trump's name and was included in a 2003 album for Epstein's 50th birthday. Mr Trump denied writing the letter, calling it 'false, malicious, and defamatory'.

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