Amidst rising scrutiny over misuse of taxpayer money, 23 Republican state attorneys general sent a letter to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Chief Administrator Lee Zeldin, calling for the cancellation of federal grants to the Environmental Law Institute (ELI), which runs the radical “judicial education” effort Climate Judiciary Project (CJP).
The letter calls on the Trump Administration to end the agency’s funding to ELI amid rising concerns over CJP’s role in climate lawfare. From the letter:
“The Climate Judiciary Project’s mission is clear: lobby judges in order to make climate change policy through the courts…the Climate Judiciary Project calls its education “objective and trusted” and “reliable.” Education is not “neutral,” “objective,” or “reliable” if it is provided by individuals who are working with one side in active litigation and is designed to sway judges to that party’s side.”
Montana Attorney General Austin Knudsen, who spearheaded the effort, explained why the letter was necessary, as Fox News reports:
“The Environmental Law Institute’s Climate Judiciary Project is using woke climate propaganda, under the guise of what they call ‘neutral’ education, to persuade judges and push their wildly unpopular agenda through the court system.”
Escalating Criticism of the Climate Judiciary Project
The AGs’ letter is the latest escalation from policymakers and industry leaders concerned with CJP’s role in training federal judges.
In June, a House Oversight subcommittee held a hearing on widespread NGO abuse, specifically looking at CJP as an egregious example of a taxpayer-funded NGO pursuing a radical climate agenda. Scott Walker, president of the Capital Research Center, highlighted CJP’s judicial “education” as a specific area of concern:
“…the controversial Climate Judiciary Project, which seeks to ‘educate’—from a left-wing perspective—federal and state judges about climate change and related litigation designed to extract billions of dollars from oil and gas companies for alleged climate harms. These trainings attempt to influence the very judges who hearing these cases, using a curriculum developed in part by individuals assisting with that litigation.”
CJP’s out-of-the-norm judicial education program, which has briefed more than 2,000 judges nationwide plaintiff-friendly courtroom applications of climate science, has been investigated by other members of Congress, namely Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX).
In February of 2024, Sen. Cruz sent a letter to the Environmental Law Institute, demanding information on CJP’s ties to academics supporting plaintiffs in climate cases. This year, Sen. Cruz doubled down during a Senate Judiciary Subcommittee hearing that highlighted CJP’s biased training programs, an initiative Sen. Cruz characterized as “judicial capture.”
Energy industry groups have also upped the pressure against the Climate Judiciary Project. Just this month, Power the Future Executive Director Dan Turner sent a letter to U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi, expressing similar concerns about CJP’s partnership with the taxpayer-funded Federal Judicial Center. As the letter explains, according to Fox News:
“Power The Future is concerned that the [Federal Judicial Center] is actively assisting in a campaign which boasts of having ‘educated’ approximately two thousand judges, including federal judges, on how to approach climate ‘litigation.’ ‘Climate’ litigation actually seeks in part to impose federal energy (rationing) policy through the courts, even though policy ‘must be addressed by the two other branches of government.’” [emphasis added]
Unsurprisingly, representatives of the Environmental Law Institute have denied any bias in CJP’s judicial trainings, but lawmakers remain unconvinced.
Taxpayer-Funded Groups Push Radical Agendas
Prior investigations of ELI have primarily focused on its funding and personnel overlap with plaintiffs lawyers’ and academics supporting climate lawfare.
CJP receives dedicated funding from several left-wing nonprofits, many of which also donate to Sher Edling LLP, the private law firm representing the majority of plaintiffs in climate lawsuits. An 2019 grant from the MacArthur Foundation, also Sher Edling funder, stated that CJP would help “build a body of law supporting climate action” – presumably, by priming judges to rule in favor of plaintiffs in climate cases.
But ELI also receives taxpayer funds to support its programs, as the AGs’ letter points out. In 2024, ELI received funding from the EPA, National Science Foundation, Department of Commerce, Department of State, USAID, and Department of Homeland Security. Grants from all these agencies totaled a staggering amount of over $937,000, all given to an organization actively involved in climate lawfare.
Bottom Line: The national, coordinated litigation campaign is a threat to American energy dominance and energy affordability. From state attorneys general to leaders in Congress, a rising wave of policymakers are ringing the alarm over the Climate Judiciary Project’s inappropriate intrusion into judicial impartiality.
