Climate
Privacy
Bob Dylan
Drones
Data Centers
AI Governance
2026 Maine Senate Race
US Fight Over Climate Science Guidance
Coverage from The New York Times, Inside Climate News, and others
Articles
22
Active Days
167
The Topic
US officials and political coalitions are contesting how climate science is presented in judicial reference materials and national parks. A climate chapter was removed from the Federal Judicial Center’s scientific reference manual after objections from Republican attorneys general, while Democratic attorneys general and scientific organizations have sought its return; a federal judge separately ordered climate-related park materials restored. The disputes matter because they affect how judges, public officials, and visitors access scientific and historical information during ongoing climate litigation and policy debates.
First Article: 02/10/26
Latest Article: 07/26/26
Summary
- The Federal Judicial Center removed a 90-page climate science chapter from its digital judicial reference manual after objections from 27 Republican state attorneys general.
- The National Academies continues to host the chapter, while Democratic attorneys general and scientific organizations are pressing for its reinstatement in the judicial manual.
- Critics allege the chapter is biased against fossil-fuel interests; its authors and supporters describe it as peer-reviewed, neutral background for evaluating expert testimony.
- President Donald Trump has separately attacked National Academies climate guidance and called for a review of the organization, without identifying specific scientific errors.
- A federal judge ordered the National Park Service to restore climate-related signs and exhibits removed under an administration effort to revise park interpretation.
- The disputes reflect broader political pressure over the authority, neutrality, and public presentation of mainstream climate science.
History
The story now emphasizes an active counter-campaign: Democratic attorneys general and scientific organizations are pushing to restore the removed climate chapter, while the park-materials dispute is framed as a court-ordered restoration of interpretive content. The current version also adds sharper attribution by naming the chapter’s critics as alleging fossil-fuel bias and the authors as defending it as neutral, peer-reviewed background.
The story now includes a sharper institutional split over climate guidance: the Federal Judicial Center removed the judicial manual’s climate chapter while the National Academies kept it online, triggering fresh pressure from Democratic attorneys general and new scrutiny from Trump. The park-materials dispute also advanced from controversy to court-ordered restoration.
Featured
Timeline: 167 Days
Hover over any logo to see coverage summary, click for full article.