National Academy of Sciences Removes Climate Chapter from Judicial Manual

• The Federal Judicial Center removed the climate science chapter from its version of the judicial manual used by federal judges, while the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine retained it on its website.
• Critics have long argued that the manual's language targeted oil and gas companies, and some contributing authors were involved in litigation against the fossil fuel industry.
• The removal of the climate chapter from the Federal Judicial Center's manual may impact the availability of peer-reviewed information on climate science in federal court decisions.
• President Trump and conservative advocates had pressured the National Academy to review the handbook's climate section.

The NAS had initially stated that questions about the processes used to develop the chapter warranted an independent review, and that the chapter would not appear on its website while that review was underway. However, the chapter was subsequently retained on the National Academies' website even as the Federal Judicial Center removed it from its version of the manual.

The Federal Judicial Center removed the climate science chapter from its version of the Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence, a judicial manual used by federal judges. The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, a partner in producing the manual, initially stated the chapter would not appear on its website during a review but subsequently retained it on its website, following pressure from President Donald Trump and conservative advocates. This move is a significant development for lawyers and compliance officers handling cases involving climate change, as it may impact the availability of peer-reviewed information on climate science in federal court. The handbook's climate section provided jurists with crucial insights into the greenhouse effect, ecological feedback loops, and other key topics. However, critics have long argued that the manual's language targeted oil and gas companies, and some contributing authors were involved in litigation against the fossil fuel industry. The removal of the climate chapter raises questions about the role of scientific evidence in federal court decisions and the potential for bias in the judicial process.

The climate science section has been a contentious issue since its inclusion in the reference manual. Republican lawmakers and conservative advocates have long criticized the chapter, arguing that it presented a biased view of climate change and targeted fossil fuel companies. In February, a group of Republican state attorneys general urged Congress to investigate the manual, claiming that its language was 'highly biased' and 'agenda-driven.' These criticisms were echoed by President Trump, who claimed that the handbook contained 'fraudulent' information on climate change. The National Academy's decision to review the chapter and remove it from online versions of the handbook is a response to these concerns.

The removal of the climate science chapter may have significant implications for lawyers handling cases involving climate change. The handbook's climate section provided federal judges with peer-reviewed information on key topics, which may no longer be available in the Federal Judicial Center's version. This development raises questions about the availability of reliable scientific evidence in federal court decisions and the potential for bias in the judicial process. Lawyers and compliance officers should be aware of this change and consider its impact on their clients' cases.

Lawyers and compliance officers should be aware that this development may impact their clients' cases involving climate change, as the removal of the climate chapter from the judicial manual could affect the availability of peer-reviewed information on climate science in federal court.

Source: Original reporting via CN