Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

BlueWaveNeverEnd

(13,786 posts)
Mon Mar 2, 2026, 02:10 PM 21 hrs ago

Scientists Decry 'Political Attack' on Reference Manual for Judges -deletion of a chapter on climate science

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/03/02/climate/climate-science-judges-manual.html?unlocked_article_code=1.QFA.LznX.7ON4TsdwizMK&smid=url-share

Scientists Decry ‘Political Attack’ on Reference Manual for Judges
More than two dozen contributors to the manual criticized the deletion of a chapter on climate science by the Federal Judicial Center.
More than two dozen contributors to a widely used reference manual for judges are raising alarm bells about political interference after the deletion of a chapter on climate science.

The uproar is over the latest edition of the Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence, which has been published since 1994 by the Federal Judicial Center, an agency that provides resources to judges. A group of Republican state attorneys general sent a letter to the center on Jan. 29, claiming that the climate chapter was biased and demanding its retraction. About a week later, the center deleted the chapter from its online edition of the nearly 1,700-page manual.

A new letter posted on Monday, signed by 28 experts in science, technology and law who had written other chapters of the manual, strongly criticized the move. The topics they had written about included engineering, neuroscience and toxicology. Their letter was posted online by Science Politics, a publication of Georgetown University’s School of Foreign Service.

“The coordinated effort by 27 state attorneys general to remove that peer-reviewed content is a direct challenge to the independence of the federal judiciary and an attack on a thoroughly vetted exposition of climate science that those attorneys general do not like,” the letter said.
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Scientists Decry 'Politic...