The Federal Judicial Center has removed a climate science chapter from its influential Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence following pressure from Republican state attorneys general who claimed the guidance was biased.
What Happened
The Federal Judicial Center, which serves as the education and research arm of the federal court system, deleted the climate science section from the fourth edition of its Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence. The manual was released on December 31, 2025, and the climate chapter was removed approximately six weeks later following mounting criticism from state officials.
According to Fox News Digital reporting, Federal Judge Robin Rosenberg, who leads the Federal Judicial Center, notified West Virginia Attorney General JB McCuskey on February 6, 2026, that the climate policy chapter had been omitted from the manual. The approximately 1,600-page guide was reduced to around 1,662 pages following the deletion.
Why It Was Removed
A group of 27 Republican attorneys general, led by West Virginia and Nebraska, formally complained about the climate chapter. They argued that the guidance was politically biased and presented climate change as settled fact rather than offering neutral scientific guidance to judges overseeing complex cases.
The chapter was authored by Jessica Wentz, a fellow at Columbia University’s Sabin Center, and climate scientist Radley Horton, and reviewed by Sabin Center executive director Michael Burger. Republicans criticized the sourcing as relying on left-wing climate advocates rather than providing impartial scientific guidance.
“Nothing is ‘independent’ or ‘impartial’ in issuing a document on behalf of America’s judges declaring that only one preferred view is ‘within the boundaries of scientifically sound knowledge,’” the Republican attorneys stated in their complaint. They also objected to the manual’s characterization of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change as an “authoritative science body.”
Reactions and Implications
Republican officials hailed the removal as a victory for judicial impartiality. West Virginia Attorney General McCuskey called it “a win for impartiality in our judiciary and for the people of West Virginia,” while Nebraska Attorney General Mike Hilgers posted “Huge win” on social media.
However, the deletion creates a significant gap in judicial guidance. More than 99.9 percent of peer-reviewed scientific papers agree that climate change is real and caused by humans, according to scientific consensus data. Without the reference manual’s climate chapter, judges will lack standardized guidance when ruling on climate-related cases.
Notably, Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan’s introduction to the document still references the climate chapter, creating an internal inconsistency that has not yet been corrected.
Broader Context
The removal reflects a broader Republican effort to limit climate litigation impacts on the fossil fuel industry. According to reporting on the broader campaign, the effort is part of an ongoing strategy to thwart climate lawsuits that the fossil fuel industry has warned could cost it billions of dollars.
The controversy also highlights questions about how judicial training materials are developed and reviewed, particularly regarding neutral guidance on scientifically contested topics where the scientific consensus overwhelmingly favors one perspective.