A chapter on climate science has been removed from a key legal reference manual following demands from 27 Republican state attorneys general, sparking outrage among scientists who contributed to the publication. The incident highlights a growing trend of political interference in scientific resources used by the judiciary.
Background: The Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence
The Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence, published by the Federal Judicial Center since 1994, serves as a vital guide for judges navigating complex scientific issues in court. Developed in collaboration with the prestigious National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, the manual has long been considered a neutral and authoritative source. The now-deleted chapter provided judges with peer-reviewed, evidence-based insights into climate science.
The Pressure Campaign and Removal
On January 29th, the state attorneys general sent a letter to the Federal Judicial Center alleging bias in the climate chapter. Just a week later, the chapter was quietly removed from the manual’s online edition. This rapid response raises questions about the extent of political influence over legal resources. The National Academies, which still hosts the chapter on its website, has affirmed its commitment to the original content.
Expert Backlash
A group of 28 scientists, engineers, and legal experts who contributed to other sections of the manual have now publicly denounced the removal. Their letter, published by Georgetown University’s Science Politics, describes the move as a direct attack on judicial independence. The signatories argue that the attorneys general’s actions undermine the judiciary’s ability to rely on vetted scientific evidence.
Escalation and Further Demands
The attorneys general, led by Montana’s Austin Knudsen, have not stopped there. They have now pressured the National Academies to remove the chapter from its own website, calling the organization’s continued availability of the resource “unacceptable.” This escalation suggests a broader strategy to discredit or suppress scientific consensus on climate change within legal proceedings.
The removal of the climate science chapter from the Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence is a troubling sign. It demonstrates how political pressure can override scientific integrity even in institutions designed to be objective and impartial. The incident underscores the urgent need to protect scientific independence and ensure that judges have access to accurate, unbiased information when making critical legal decisions.
