House Judiciary Committee Investigates Climate Group for Training 2,000 Judges in Secret Sessions
The principle of judicial impartiality isn’t just legal tradition—it’s the bedrock of a functioning republic. When judges take an oath, they promise to decide cases based on law and facts, not on private seminars or secret communications with interested parties. Yet across America, courtrooms have become staging grounds for climate activism dressed up as litigation. Cities and counties seek billions in damages from energy companies for everything from heat waves to hurricanes, as if weather never existed before the combustion engine.
This week, the House Judiciary Committee revealed what many suspected: there’s been a systematic effort to prejudice judges handling these cases. The investigation targets the Environmental Law Institute and its Climate Judiciary Project, which has quietly “educated” more than 2,000 federal and state judges since 2018. These aren’t public seminars with transparent materials—they’re closed-door sessions with hidden funding sources and concealed participant lists.
From the House Judiciary Committee letter:
These efforts appear to have the underlying goal of predisposing federal and state judges in favor of plaintiffs alleging injuries from the manufacturing, marketing, or sale of fossil-fuel products. Parties to lawsuits thus have no way of knowing whether the judges in their cases are among the thousands that ELI and CJP have attempted to influence, and have no way to meaningfully evaluate whether the judges should recuse from their cases.
The committee uncovered something even more troubling (and I’m not easily shocked anymore): a private online forum operated from September 2022 to May 2024 where climate activists could communicate directly with judges. The forum’s been scrubbed from public view, but not before investigators documented its existence. The trainers aren’t neutral educators either—they’re “known associates of organizations closely allied with the radical decarbonization movement,” according to the committee’s findings.
Consider Judge Ann Aiken, who presided over the infamous Juliana case where children sued to force the government to implement climate policies Congress never passed. While that case was pending, Judge Aiken attended a conference featuring the plaintiffs’ lead counsel. That’s not education—that’s what we used to call cheating before everyone got so polite about corruption. Hawaii’s Chief Justice Mark Recktenwald taught courses for the same group while overseeing climate lawsuits against oil companies.
Here’s where I nearly spit out my coffee: while these activists train judges to believe we’re in a climate emergency, actual data shows the polar ice caps are gaining ice. The whole premise of their economic terrorism turns out to be as solid as a snowball in July. But facts don’t matter when you’ve already programmed 2,000 judges to see carbon dioxide as a weapon of mass destruction.
This isn’t just about climate cases. It’s about whether we still have an independent judiciary or whether Lady Justice has become another captured institution serving the left’s agenda. When judges can be secretly trained, when their expenses can be covered by unknown donors, when they can chat privately with activists while presiding over their cases—that’s not justice. That’s theater, and we’re all paying for admission with our liberty and our economy. The House investigation better not stop at strongly worded letters. I want names. I want receipts. Two thousand judges received this training. Every single climate verdict they’ve rendered should now be considered tainted.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment