In a recent development, a right-wing think tank in the U.S. has leveled serious accusations against the Environmental Law Institute (ELI), a nonprofit organization focused on educating judges about climate issues, claiming it is “corruptly influencing the courts.” Located in Washington, D.C., ELI oversees the Climate Judiciary Project, which aims to equip judges and attorneys with impartial, science-based insights on climate change.
ELI’s website states that the Project seeks to enhance judicial education by providing objective information on climate science that is relevant to ongoing and upcoming legal cases. However, the American Energy Institute (AEI), a think tank aligned with fossil fuel interests, has launched a campaign against ELI, alleging that its seminars promote dubious climate science.
In an August report, AEI accused ELI of “corruptly influencing the courts and destroying the rule of law.” The report contends that ELI misrepresents itself as a neutral organization while engaging with cities and states suing major oil companies for allegedly misleading the public about climate change. AEI’s accompanying PowerPoint presentation claimed that the Climate Judiciary Project works covertly to influence judges in favor of plaintiffs in climate litigation.
The report also exposes links between AEI and CRC Advisors, a public relations firm chaired by Leonard Leo, a significant figure in the conservative movement known for his role in judicial appointments during the Trump administration. David Armiak, from the Center for Media and Democracy, remarked on Leo’s influential role in steering the U.S. federal court system to the right, suggesting that CRC Advisors’ partnership with AEI could undermine efforts to inform the courts about climate change.
Intriguingly, the report identifies Maggie Howell and Kevin Daley from CRC Advisors as the authors behind AEI’s findings and presentation. Efforts to obtain comments from CRC Advisors and Leo did not elicit responses.
Responding to the allegations, Jason Isaac, CEO of AEI, maintained that the nonprofit had engaged CRC Advisors to investigate purported corrupt ties between the federal judiciary and left-leaning funding groups. However, Kert Davies, director of special investigations at the Center for Climate Integrity, countered AEI’s claims, asserting that ELI is not biased and features a diverse array of legal and climate experts.
Davies further emphasized that ELI’s seminars aim to prepare judges for complex climate issues essential for informed rulings. Amid ongoing litigation against oil companies, especially those facing accusations of downplaying climate risks, the timing of the AEI report has raised eyebrows. Cities like Honolulu are pressing forward with legal actions against oil majors to hold them accountable for their environmental impacts.
Isaac criticized the companies affiliated with ELI, suggesting that they pursue political agendas detrimental to national interests, including environmental, social, and governance (ESG) norms. In contrast, Collins from ELI condemned the AEI report as filled with misinformation from an organization known for spreading false claims about climate science.
As the Supreme Court gears up to review various climate litigation cases, the friction between educational initiatives like ELI’s and organizations like AEI spotlights the broader struggle over the interpretation and application of climate science within the legal framework.
