AGU decries the recent removal of a chapter on climate science from the 2025 4th edition of the Federal Judicial Center’s Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence, particularly at a moment when judges are likely to encounter increasingly complex and critical issues related to climate change.
The Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence is one of the judiciary’s most widely used resources for understanding complex scientific and technical issues. Without the climate science chapter, courts have fewer tools to interpret the scientific principles underlying many climate-related disputes.
This need is especially urgent following the 2024 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, which upended judicial precedent deferring to federal agencies’ technical expertise when interpreting ambiguous laws. This decision means that courts must now exercise independent judgment when determining the meaning of federal statutes and grapple more directly with complex scientific and technical questions.
Against this backdrop, the recent decision to remove the new chapter on climate science amid pressure from 27 Republican attorneys general is deeply concerning. The chapter was designed to help judges understand foundational principles of climate science. AGU calls for reinstating the chapter so judges and legal professionals have access to clear, credible scientific guidance when evaluating cases involving climate evidence.
The science described in the chapter reflects peer-reviewed research synthesized in assessments and reports produced by authoritative international bodies, such as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the World Meteorological Organization. These assessments draw on thousands of studies conducted by scientists worldwide, including research published in AGU journals, to provide reliable evaluations of climate science.
AGU stands firmly behind the science published in its journals and by its members. Efforts to sideline climate science from judicial reference materials risk politicizing knowledge grounded in a vast body of rigorous research.
Climate science is not, and should never be, a partisan issue. Courts evaluating evidence related to climate science deserve access to clear, credible scientific information, and the public deserves a legal system equipped to consider that evidence when decisions carry profound consequences for our health, welfare, and economic future.
Court decisions that lack access to climate science will be worse for us all.
[Disclaimer: The content in this RSS feed is automatically fetched from external sources. All trademarks, images, and opinions belong to their respective owners. We are not responsible for the accuracy or reliability of third-party content.]
Source link
