Lawmakers Probe Climate Training for U.S. Judges

Judge presiding in a wood-paneled courtroom — Photo: Gorodenkoff / Shutterstock

A climate-education program backed by a Washington nonprofit has quietly trained more than 2,000 American judges while a new national security report accuses it of advancing Communist China’s energy agenda.

Story Snapshot

A report says the Environmental Law Institute’s Climate Judiciary Project has trained over 2,000 U.S. judges on climate and energy law.
National security analysts claim the group’s work helps constrain American energy producers while lining up with Chinese strategic interests.
Senate and House Republicans are demanding investigations into alleged foreign influence and ideological bias in judicial trainings.
The Environmental Law Institute insists its climate curriculum is neutral, science-based education and denies telling judges how to rule.

A Climate Law Program Reaches Deep Into the American Judiciary

Since 2018, the Environmental Law Institute’s Climate Judiciary Project has offered training on climate science and environmental law to American judges across the country. The group’s own descriptions say the project provides “authoritative, objective, and trusted education” on climate science and how it appears in court cases. Public materials and reporting state that more than 2,000 state and federal judges have taken part in this curriculum. That scale means a large share of judges hearing energy and climate disputes have now passed through a single program.

Environmental Law Institute materials present the Climate Judiciary Project as a neutral, evidence-based effort to help judges understand complex scientific issues. The project says it does not participate in litigation, coordinate with parties, or advise judges how they should rule in any case. It partners with respected institutions such as the National Judicial College and the Federal Judicial Center to deliver seminars and courses on climate science for judges. Supporters argue judges need this kind of training to handle technical climate lawsuits fairly.

New Report Alleges China-Linked Influences and Anti-Energy Bias

A new report from national security group State Armor challenges that neutral picture and urges Congress to investigate. The report says the Environmental Law Institute has spent decades working with Chinese government-linked agencies, universities, judges, and legal groups through a China Program. At the same time, the group has trained more than 2,000 American judges through the Climate Judiciary Project on climate science and litigation frameworks. State Armor alleges this combination advances Chinese strategic interests by constraining U.S. energy producers and industrial growth.

According to State Armor’s letter, the jurisprudential frameworks promoted in Environmental Law Institute trainings favor regulatory limits on American energy production without similar limits in China. The report claims Climate Judiciary Project materials encourage judges to hold energy companies legally responsible and to view lawsuits as a tool to regulate the industry. It further alleges some curriculum pieces and presentations were created or funded by individuals with political or financial stakes in active climate cases, relationships that were not disclosed to attending judges. These claims paint the program as tilted against traditional American energy.

Senators and House Leaders Press for Oversight and Answers

Senator Ted Cruz and other Republicans have already raised alarms about climate-focused judicial trainings, describing them as part of a broader “climate lawfare machine” aimed at U.S. energy producers. In a Senate hearing, Cruz argued that left-leaning nonprofits are “quietly captured and brainwashed” judges through closed-door sessions on climate issues. He singled out the Environmental Law Institute and its Climate Judiciary Project as having “near total control” over climate-related training for judges and accused the project of ex parte indoctrination. Those hearings connected judicial education directly to national energy security concerns.

Senator Marsha Blackburn recently sent a letter to the director of the Federal Judicial Center about the State Armor report, warning that Communist China may be influencing American courts through Environmental Law Institute programs. Blackburn’s letter says Climate Judiciary Project has trained more than 2,000 judges “on far-left climate ideology” and allegedly teaches them how to frame cases, influence colleagues who resist climate action, and even work through topics like “implicit bias” and “resistance to change.” She argues this goes far beyond normal continuing legal education and could shape rulings against U.S. energy interests.

House Judiciary Republicans Probe Judicial Independence and Foreign Ties

House Judiciary Committee Republicans previously opened a formal investigation into alleged improper attempts by climate education programs to influence federal judges. A 2026 letter from the committee leadership to a climate law center director states that evidence raises questions about coordination between these educational efforts and plaintiffs in climate-related litigation. The letter quotes Environmental Law Institute describing Climate Judiciary Project as a resource for judges needing information about “the legal and scientific issues in the climate litigation of today and tomorrow.” Lawmakers say this kind of focus risks crossing from neutral education into steering legal outcomes.

The State Armor report adds a foreign policy layer to those concerns by tying Environmental Law Institute’s China Program to its judicial trainings. It argues that Chinese Communist Party-aligned institutions receive environmental governance expertise while American judges are nudged toward legal theories that weaken domestic energy producers. This alleged “asymmetric” pattern speaks directly to fears shared by many conservatives and liberals that elites use courts and complex programs to shift power away from ordinary Americans and toward foreign interests. However, the available public record still lacks donor lists or direct funding documents proving Chinese control over Climate Judiciary Project content.

Competing Narratives: Neutral Education or Ideological Lawfare?

Environmental Law Institute and its allies continue to defend Climate Judiciary Project as a non-partisan initiative rooted in mainstream science. They say judges asked for help understanding climate evidence and that the program simply answers that need with objective information. Critics, including State Armor, Fox News commentators, and some Republican lawmakers, describe the same effort as a vehicle to make judges more receptive to climate lawsuits against energy producers. For now, the dispute centers on curriculum content, long-standing ties to Chinese institutions, and the enormous reach of training more than 2,000 judges, not on proven changes in specific case rulings.