On Thursday, January 29, 2026, Fox News reported that a reference manual used by judges nationwide is facing criticism for alleged ideological bias in its climate section. The fourth edition of the Federal Judicial Center’s Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence, which includes a foreword by Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan, is accused of blurring the line between educating judges and indoctrinating them with left-wing advocacy.
The manual, approximately 1,600 pages long and released at the beginning of the year, contains citations and footnotes referencing climate change activists and proponents, including climatologist Michael Mann and environmental law expert Jessica Wentz. Wentz is identified as the leading expert at the Climate Judiciary Project at the Environmental Law Institute, an entity currently under federal investigation, according to Fox News Digital.
A statement from House Judiciary Committee members Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) and Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) indicated that the Committee is investigating allegations of improper attempts by the Environmental Law Institute (ELI) and its Climate Judiciary Project (CJP) to influence federal judges. Jordan and Issa reportedly found evidence of efforts to influence judges who may be presiding over lawsuits related to alleged climate change claims, with the goal of predisposing federal judges in favor of plaintiffs alleging injuries from the manufacturing, marketing, use, or sale of fossil-fuel products.
A spokesperson for the institute defended CJP’s curriculum, stating that it is “fact-based and science-first, grounded in consensus reports and developed with a robust peer review process” and that suggestions otherwise are “without merit.”
Wentz, who is also a senior fellow at Columbia’s Sabin Center for Climate Law, is listed as the chief author of the section, along with fellow university faculty Radley Horton, on page 1561. She served as a witness for the plaintiffs in Juliana v. U.S., where youth activists accused the U.S. government of violating their constitutional rights by failing to implement their preferred climate change policies. She also signed an amicus brief supporting the Obama administration’s environmental regulations after multiple states filed lawsuits against the EPA in 2016.
Legal experts have warned of the potential repercussions of having such prominent contributors in what is supposed to be an apolitical anthology. Carrie Severino, a former law clerk for Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas and president of the Judicial Crisis Network, stated that the Left’s effort to capture the judiciary is alarming, as it feeds trial lawyers’ climate ‘science’ to sitting judges who will decide contentious litigation in this area, short-circuiting the system of justice. Severino added that when extreme policies cannot be passed into law, attempts are made to use the courts as an end run around the legislative process.
Michael Fragoso of Torridon Law, former chief counsel to Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), agreed that there is rank bias throughout the climate section of the anthology, calling the whole section shockingly inappropriate. He noted that the section on attribution ‘science’ was lifted in large part by a previous article written by the two authors and Michael Burger, who is himself a climate-plaintiff lawyer. Fragoso also pointed out that it is shocking that the Judicial Center would let a plaintiff lawyer ‘explain’ attribution, which is at the heart of these lawsuits, to judges, and that it is even worse that it’s hidden in a random footnote.
The House Judiciary Committee previously alleged that CJP’s efforts appear to have the underlying goal of predisposing federal judges in favor of plaintiffs involved in climate litigation.
Mann, a climate change academic in Pennsylvania, authored a book called “The New Climate War,” and the judges’ guide cites the book to claim the energy industry has sought to deceive the public. Mann resigned from a role at the University of Pennsylvania in 2025 after disparaging social media comments about Charlie Kirk that invoked the Hitler Youth movement. He also previously successfully sued conservative commentator Mark Steyn for $1 million – later reduced to $5,000 by the court and resulting in an added sanction on Mann – over aggressive criticism of his famous “hockey stick graph” that resulted from his study of human influence on global warming over the centuries.
Source: Fox News
