Montana AG Leads Charge to Defund National Academy Over Biased Climate Manual

Here’s what should outrage every American who pays taxes: a supposedly neutral scientific organization took your money and used it to push climate activism dressed up as objective research. And they got caught doing it.

Montana Attorney General Austin Knudsen isn’t mincing words. He’s leading over a dozen Republican state attorneys general in demanding that the Trump administration yank funding from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. The reason? They produced what amounts to a political playbook designed to influence judges in billion-dollar climate lawsuits, all while pretending it was impartial science.

The manual in question was supposed to help federal judges understand complex scientific evidence. Noble goal, right? Except this particular chapter on climate change reads more like a litigation strategy guide than an educational resource. It was funded by groups with direct ties to climate lawsuits, written by academics who moonlight as climate activists, and shaped by attorneys already suing fossil fuel companies. You know what we call that in the real world? A con job.

Let’s talk about the money trail because it’s always about following the money. The Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation helped fund this manual. That same foundation donated to the Collective Action Fund, which then sent money to Sher Edling, a law firm that makes its living suing energy companies over climate change. If that sounds like a conflict of interest to you, congratulations on having common sense. The attorneys general argue it violates the terms of an $875,000 grant from the National Science Foundation that was supposed to produce objective educational material.

The National Academies pulls in tens of millions of taxpayer dollars every year. They’re supposed to be the gold standard for scientific integrity. Instead, they’re letting activist lawyers and ideologically driven academics write judicial guidance that could swing multi-billion-dollar cases. That’s not science. That’s advocacy with a lab coat thrown over it.

Consider Jessica Wentz, one of the chapter’s authors. She works at Columbia Law School’s Sabin Center for Climate Change Law. She’s written legal briefs arguing the world needs to phase out fossil fuels as fast as possible to avoid catastrophic warming. Fine, she’s entitled to her opinion. But should someone with that clear an agenda be writing supposedly neutral guidance for federal judges? The Sabin Center gets funding from the Rockefeller Family Fund, which has bankrolled a litigation campaign against fossil fuel companies. The connections aren’t subtle. They’re brazen.

This matters beyond just one sketchy manual. When institutions that claim scientific neutrality become political weapons, they poison the well for everyone. Real science requires skepticism, debate, and the willingness to challenge prevailing wisdom. What we’re seeing here is the opposite: predetermined conclusions wrapped in the language of objectivity, designed to short-circuit judicial reasoning before cases even reach trial.

The Federal Judicial Center already removed the climate chapter from its version of the manual last month after Republican attorneys general raised hell about it. That’s progress, but it’s not enough. The National Academies need to face real consequences for this breach of public trust. Knudsen wants them suspended or barred from all federal contracts and grants. That might sound harsh until you remember they took public money under false pretenses.

Secretary of Transportation Sean Duffy, Energy Secretary Chris Wright, and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth received the letter. The Pentagon declined to comment, which tells you exactly nothing. But this administration ran on draining the swamp and ending the weaponization of federal agencies. Here’s a perfect test case.

Knudsen told The Daily Wire that taxpayer dollars shouldn’t fund efforts to influence judges improperly. He’s right. The organizations pushing climate agendas on the judiciary need investigation and defunding. Period. As he put it, he’ll keep sounding the alarm until the deception ends.

There’s a broader principle at stake here. Limited government means government that doesn’t pick winners and losers in the marketplace or the courtroom. When federal agencies funnel money to organizations that then produce biased materials to sway litigation, that’s government putting its thumb on the scale. It’s the opposite of the rule of law. It’s manipulation dressed up as expertise.

The climate debate deserves honest brokers, not activists masquerading as neutral scientists. Americans can handle complex trade-offs between energy policy, economic growth, and environmental stewardship. What we can’t handle is being lied to by institutions we’re forced to fund. The National Academies made their choice. Now they should face the consequences.