A Washington, D.C. nonprofit has quietly trained more than 2,000 state and federal judges on climate science, and House Republicans now want to know if that training was built to help plaintiffs sue American energy companies out of business.
Quick Take
- The Environmental Law Institute’s Climate Judiciary Project has trained over 2,000 judges since 2018 on climate science and law.
- House Judiciary Committee Republicans opened a formal probe into whether the group improperly coordinated with climate litigation plaintiffs.
- Senator Ted Cruz previously warned the group’s curriculum reads like “a playbook” for judges to rule against energy companies.
- The group insists it is neutral and does not tell judges how to rule, but critics say the courses target energy producers.
Judicial Training Program Draws Scrutiny
The Environmental Law Institute launched its Climate Judiciary Project in 2018 to teach judges about climate science and how it shows up in courtrooms. The group says it has trained more than 2,000 state and federal judges since then, calling its curriculum “authoritative, objective, and trusted”. But that scale of reach into the judiciary is exactly what has conservatives raising red flags.
The Environmental Law Institute’s own materials admit the program is meant to shape how judges understand “the legal and scientific issues in the climate litigation of today and tomorrow”. For an outside group to say it wants to influence how judges see climate lawsuits, that is a bold admission critics say deserves real scrutiny, not a pass just because it calls itself educational.
House Committee Investigates Coordination Claims
House Judiciary Committee Republicans sent a letter on April 28, 2026, to the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law demanding answers. The letter says evidence has surfaced suggesting the group may have coordinated with parties actively suing energy companies in climate cases. Fox News reported the group has been alleged to be a partner to more than two dozen public plaintiffs suing energy providers.
The committee’s concern is straightforward. If a group is secretly working with lawyers who are suing oil, gas, and coal companies, and that same group is training the judges who hear those cases, that looks less like education and more like a coordinated campaign against American energy.
Curriculum Called a “Playbook” for Plaintiffs
Senator Ted Cruz sent a letter to the Environmental Law Institute back in February 2024 raising similar alarms. His letter stated that while the group claims its project is “neutral” and “objective,” the curriculum “reads like a playbook for judges to find in favor of plaintiffs” in climate lawsuits. That is not a stray comment from a random critic. It is a sitting United States senator calling out a group that has direct access to the judges deciding energy cases nationwide.
The group’s curriculum specifically covers climate litigation, giving judges training on cases that directly affect energy producers. Supporters call this simple science education. Critics call it a one-sided push dressed up as a classroom course, aimed at making judges friendlier to lawsuits against American oil, gas, and coal companies.
Group Denies Wrongdoing but Concerns Persist
The Environmental Law Institute denies any wrongdoing. Its representatives say the Climate Judiciary Project does not participate in litigation, does not support any party in a lawsuit, and does not advise judges on how to rule. Those denials matter, and no records made public so far prove the group directly told any judge how to decide a case.
Still, the size of this operation is hard to ignore. Training over 2,000 judges gives one advocacy group enormous reach inside America’s courtrooms, and the House investigation is now working to find out exactly how that reach has been used. Some online commentary has tied the group to Chinese Communist Party influence, but the publicly available record reviewed here contains no funding documents, donor records, or communications proving any Chinese-linked entity controls or directs the project. That specific claim remains unproven and should be treated as such until real evidence surfaces.
What is proven is this: an outside group built a pipeline into the American judiciary, admitted its goal is shaping how judges see climate lawsuits, and now faces a formal congressional investigation into whether it teamed up with plaintiffs targeting the energy sector. That alone should worry anyone who believes courts should stay neutral, not become another front in the war on American energy.
Sources:
youtube.com, eli.org, cjp.eli.org, judges.org, judiciary.house.gov, law.georgetown.edu, commerce.senate.gov
