独家新闻： 近半数州总检察长将要求众议院司法委员会扩大对气候政策相关影响联邦法官的调查范围，将联邦法官用于审查其通常不熟悉主题的“黄金标准”指南也纳入调查。
这一进展发生在《福克斯新闻数字版》报道凸显对联邦司法中心（FJC）最新版1600页的《科学证据参考手册》批评之后。批评者称，这本传统上无政治倾向的参考指南如今充斥着与气候变化相关的意识形态偏见，大量脚注引用了倾向自由派和气候预警论的来源。
联邦司法中心本身是联邦司法系统的研究和教育机构，其管理委员会由首席大法官约翰·罗伯茨（John Roberts）主持。
内布拉斯加州总检察长迈克·希尔格斯（Mike Hilgers）正牵头推进这一行动，他致信众议院司法委员会主席、俄亥俄州共和党人吉姆·乔丹（Jim Jordan）、小组委员会主席、加利福尼亚州共和党人达雷尔·伊萨（Darrell Issa）以及参议院司法委员会主席、爱荷华州共和党人查尔斯·格拉斯利（Charles Grassley），敦促他们将不当影响调查范围扩大到他们所谓的“试图操纵案件结果以偏袒一方的不当行为”。
[独家消息：众议院共和党人在约翰逊允许后重启弹劾“激进主义”法官的推动]
2025年9月3日，美国俄亥俄州共和党众议员、众议院司法委员会主席吉姆·乔丹在华盛顿特区雷伯恩众议院办公楼举行的听证会上听取证词。（凯文·迪特施/盖蒂图片社）
最新版本于12月31日发布，其中包含埃琳娜·卡根（Elena Kagan）大法官的前言，随后深入探讨了与环境法专家杰西卡·文茨（Jessica Wentz）、气候学家迈克尔·曼恩（Michael Mann）以及其他参与气候变化研究和倡导工作的人士相关的主题脚注。
“同样的不当影响问题也适用于联邦司法中心及其新的《科学证据参考手册》，”总检察长们在信中写道。
他们指出，卡根的前言称手册的前几版帮助“做出更好、更公平的法律裁决”，但认为她的话在最新版本中无法得到呼应。
[气候诉讼背后的公司在法院认定“行为近乎刑事”后面临司法部移交]
2026年1月9日，人们走过美国华盛顿特区的最高法院大楼。（路透社/乔纳森·恩斯特）
“就像委员会正在调查的[气候司法项目]一样，新章节呈现出高度偏见、受议程驱动的观点，支持激进利益集团对传统化石燃料能源的生产商和使用者提起诉讼，”总检察长们辩称，并引用了哥伦比亚大学气候变化倡导者杰西卡·文茨等人的研究结果。
他们援引了文茨在反对阿拉斯加Willow钻探项目时提交的法庭简报，其中她被引述说：“世界需要尽快逐步淘汰化石燃料，以避免全球变暖及气候变化可能带来的灾难性影响。”
检察官们还指出，手册中包含了一名代表檀香山对传统能源公司提起诉讼的律师的研究成果。
[特朗普反对者博阿斯伯格被提起弹劾条款]
“鉴于其作者、评论者和来源的强烈偏见，气候变化章节将原告用来追究化石燃料被告责任的方法视为已成定论，这并不令人惊讶，”信件中写道。
“该章节将这些科学内容作为权威内容呈现，却未承认相反观点，也未披露作者、评论者和来源的诸多利益冲突。伦理专家指出，这些问题引发了严重的伦理担忧。”
希尔格斯在接受《福克斯新闻数字版》采访时表示，联邦司法中心的新科学手册本应公正呈现复杂证据，但“似乎将气候活动家和多样性、公平与包容意识形态者的观点嵌入了所谓的中立指导中”。
[克鲁兹要求弹劾博阿斯伯格及判处卡瓦诺未遂袭击案法官]
“当积极参与气候案件诉讼的倡导者和专家帮助撰写和审查一个将在幕后被联邦法官使用的章节时，这显然引发了对司法系统公正性的严重担忧，”希尔格斯说。
“[内布拉斯加人以及所有美国人]都应该得到中立和公正的法院。”
这封信还由阿拉斯加州总检察长斯蒂芬·考克斯（Stephen Cox）、佛罗里达州总检察长詹姆斯·乌斯梅耶（James Uthmeier）、西弗吉尼亚州总检察长JB·麦卡斯基（JB McCuskey）、阿拉巴马州总检察长史蒂夫·马歇尔（Steve Marshall）、肯塔基州总检察长罗素·科尔曼（Russell Coleman）以及阿肯色州、佐治亚州、爱达荷州、印第安纳州、爱荷华州、堪萨斯州、路易斯安那州、密西西比州、密苏里州、蒙大拿州、北达科他州、南达科他州、俄克拉荷马州、南卡罗来纳州、得克萨斯州和怀俄明州的其他州检察官共同签署。
[顶级能源组织呼吁调查秘密“国家法律诉讼运动”以影响法官对气候问题的看法]
芝加哥市长批评克拉伦斯·托马斯，同时为该市的赔偿工作组辩护
“我们看到全国各地荒谬的法律战愈演愈烈——政治动机团体利用我们的法院和自由派大法官推动其气候议程。这已经够糟糕了，”麦卡斯基告诉《福克斯新闻数字版》，称现在是时候阻止“垃圾科学”的影响了。
“我们……必须保护我们的司法系统及其公正性，”他说。
麦卡斯基还向联邦司法中心本身发出了一封信件，由马歇尔、乌斯梅耶、考克斯等人联合签署。
他告诉该中心主任——奥巴马任命的佛罗里达州联邦法官罗宾·罗森伯格（Robin Rosenberg）——手册的普及性必须保持可信。
“至少到目前为止，[FJC]一直谨慎强调，手册仅‘描述主要科学领域的基本原理……’。相反，第四版将司法系统坚定地置于当前诉讼中一些最具争议问题的一方：与气候相关的科学和‘归因’。”
EXCLUSIVE: Nearly half of state attorneys general will demand the House Judiciary Committee expand its probe into climate policy-related influence on federal judges to include a gold-standard guide judges use to examine subjects they are not typically versed in.
The development comes after a Fox News Digital report highlighted criticisms of the latest edition of the Federal Judicial Center’s (FJC) 1,600-page “Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence.” Critics said the traditionally apolitical reference guide is now rife with climate change–related ideological bias, citing extensive footnotes drawn from left-leaning and climate-alarmist sources.
The Federal Judicial Center itself is the research and education agency of the federal judiciary, and its governing board is chaired by Chief Justice John Roberts.
Nebraska Attorney General Mike Hilgers is leading the effort, writing to House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, subcommittee Chairman Darrell Issa, R-Calif., and Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, urging them to expand their improper-influence probe to include what they call an “inappropriate attempt to rig case outcomes in favor of one side.”
[SCOOP: HOUSE REPUBLICANS REVIVE PUSH TO IMPEACH ‘ACTIVIST’ JUDGES AFTER JOHNSON’S GREEN LIGHT]
House Judiciary Committee Chairman Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, listens during a hearing in the Rayburn House Office Building in Washington, D.C., on Sept. 3, 2025.(Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)
The latest edition was published December 31 and includes a foreword by Justice Elena Kagan before delving into subject matter footnoted to environmental law expert Jessica Wentz, climatologist Michael Mann, and a slew of others involved in climate change research and advocacy.
“Those same improper influence concerns apply to the Federal Judicial Center and its new ‘Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence’”, the attorney generals wrote in part.
They noted that Kagan’s foreword said previous editions of the manual helped “bring about better and fairer legal decisions,” but argued her words would not echo the same in the latest edition.
[FIRM BEHIND CLIMATE LAWSUITS FACES DOJ REFERRAL AFTER COURT FINDS ‘MISCONDUCT BORDERING ON CRIMINAL’]
People walk past the U.S. Supreme Court building in Washington, D.C., Jan. 9, 2026.(REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst)
“Like [the] [Climate Judiciary Project that] the Committee is investigating, the new chapter presents a highly biased, agenda-driven view favoring radical interests pursuing lawsuits against producers and users of traditional forms of fossil fuel energy,” the attorneys general argued, citing the inclusion of findings from Jessica Wentz, a climate change advocate at Columbia University, among other names.
They cited a court brief crafted by Wentz in opposition to the Willow drilling project in Alaska, where she was quoted as saying “the world needs to phase out fossil fuels as rapidly as possible in order to avert potentially catastrophic levels of global warming and climate change.”
The prosecutors also pointed to the inclusion of work from an attorney who represented the city of Honolulu in cases against traditional energy firms.
[TRUMP FOE BOASBERG HIT WITH ARTICLES OF IMPEACHMENT]
“Not surprisingly, given the strong biases of its authors, reviewers, and sources, the climate change chapter presents as settled the very methodologies that plaintiffs rely on to impose liability on fossil-fuel defendants,” the letter reads.
“The chapter presents this science as authoritative without acknowledging contrary views or disclosing the many conflicts of the authors, reviewers, and sources. Ethics experts have noted that these issues raise serious ethics concerns.”
In comments to Fox News Digital, Hilgers said the FJC’s new science manual should present complex evidence impartially, but instead “appears to embed the views of climate activists and diversity, equity, and inclusion ideologues into what is presented as neutral guidance.”
[CRUZ DEMANDS IMPEACHMENT OF BOASBERG AND JUDGE WHO SENTENCED KAVANAUGH’S ATTEMPTED ASSASSIN]
“When the same advocates and experts who are actively litigating climate cases help write and review a chapter that will be used by federal judges behind the scenes, it raises obvious and serious concerns about the impartiality of the judicial system,” Hilgers said.
“[Nebraskans, and all Americans], deserve courts that are neutral and fair.”
The letter was also signed by Alaska Attorney General Stephen Cox, Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier, West Virginia Attorney General JB McCuskey, Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall, Kentucky Attorney General Russell Coleman and their fellow state prosecutors in Arkansas, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Texas and Wyoming.
[TOP ENERGY GROUP CALLS FOR PROBE INTO SECRETIVE ‘NATIONAL LAWFARE CAMPAIGN’ TO INFLUENCE JUDGES ON CLIMATE]
Chicago mayor criticizes Clarence Thomas while defending city’s reparations task force
“We’ve seen ridiculous legal warfare grow across the country — politically motivated groups, using our courts and liberal justices to push their climate agenda. That’s bad enough,” McCuskey told Fox News Digital, saying it is time to prevent the influence of ‘junk science.’”
“We… must protect our judicial system and its impartiality,” he said.
McCuskey also fired off a missive to the FJC itself, co-signed by Marshall, Uthmeier, Cox and others.
He told the center’s director — Obama-appointed federal judge Robin Rosenberg of Florida — that the manual’s ubiquity must remain trusted.
“At least up to this point, [FJC] has been careful to stress that the Manual merely “describes basic principles of major scientific fields… Instead, the Fourth Edition places the judiciary firmly on one side of some of the most hotly disputed questions in current litigation: climate-related science and ‘attribution’.
