Full Breakdown
National Academies of Sciences Faces Pressure to Remove Climate Change Chapter from Judicial Reference Manual
3/17/2026, 10:25:26 AM
Introduction to the Controversy
The National Academies of Sciences (NAS) is under pressure from a coalition of state attorneys general to remove a chapter on climate change from its Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence. This manual, which aids judges in understanding complex scientific issues, has included this chapter for the first time in its fourth edition, reflecting the growing importance of climate-related cases in the judicial system.
Core Event: Attorneys General Demand Removal
In a letter dated February 19, 2026, the attorneys general urged the NAS to follow the Federal Judicial Center's recent decision to delete the climate chapter from the Reference Manual. They argue that the chapter promotes "one-sided advocacy" and constitutes "judicial indoctrination," claiming that the NAS is becoming a "partisan actor." The attorneys general's concerns stem from the chapter's alignment with the scientific consensus on climate change, which asserts that human emissions are contributing to global warming and necessitate significant reductions.
Background & Context: The Role of the Reference Manual
The Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence serves as a crucial resource for judges who may lack the scientific expertise to navigate cases involving complex scientific data. The inclusion of a climate change chapter was intended to equip judges with the necessary background to handle cases related to federal environmental regulations and allegations against fossil fuel producers for ignoring climate risks.
Official Statements & Responses
The NAS has not publicly responded to the attorneys general's demands but continues to maintain the chapter in its library of publications. The organization emphasizes the importance of scientific integrity and the necessity of providing judges with accurate information on climate science, which is increasingly relevant in legal contexts.
Criticism & Opposition: Concerns Over Partisanship
Critics of the climate chapter, including the coalition of attorneys general, argue that its content reflects a biased perspective that could influence judicial decisions. They cite concerns that the chapter's reliance on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's findings and the inclusion of climate-focused legal experts could undermine the impartiality expected in the judicial process.
Conflicting Reports & Gaps
While the attorneys general assert that the NAS is engaging in partisan advocacy, supporters of the climate chapter argue that it is simply presenting established scientific consensus. There is a lack of consensus on whether the chapter's content is indeed biased or if it merely reflects the prevailing scientific understanding of climate change.
What's Next: Future Implications for the NAS
The ongoing pressure from state attorneys general may lead to further scrutiny of the NAS's role in providing scientific guidance to the judiciary. The outcome of this controversy could have significant implications for how scientific evidence is utilized in legal contexts, particularly in cases related to climate change and environmental policy.
