Fox News Politics has uncovered an exclusive report revealing an unusual relationship between environmental activists and the judiciary. The Climate Judiciary Project (CJP), founded in 2018 by the left-leaning Environmental Law Institute (ELI), has been running a private online forum with judges to discuss climate-related legal matters. While CJP claims to provide judges with unbiased information on climate science and its legal implications, critics such as Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas argue that the group is secretly funded by China and left-wing activists to influence judicial decisions in favor of progressive policies. The forum was recently made private after being discovered by Fox News Digital. The report raises concerns about the potential for political bias in judicial education and the integrity of the legal process. The group’s mission, as described, is to offer judges ‘authoritative, objective, and trusted education on climate science, the impacts of climate change, and the ways climate science is arising in the law.’ However, critics are skeptical about the true intentions behind this collaboration, suggesting it could be an effort to sway court rulings in favor of climate-related legislation.
The controversy extends beyond the CJP. The report has ignited a broader debate about the role of activism in shaping public policy and judicial processes. Critics like Cruz claim that such collaborations risk undermining the independence of the judiciary, which is meant to be free from political influence. The group was previously part of a wider discussion on how climate change could influence legal decisions, but the discovery of its private forum has raised questions about the transparency and ethical implications of such partnerships. Meanwhile, advocates for the CJP argue that the organization is simply trying to provide better legal education on a critical global issue, and that the accusations against it are politically motivated. The situation has sparked a national conversation about the intersection of activism, education, and judicial integrity, with both sides presenting compelling arguments and evidence.