AG Hilgers Leads 22-State Coalition Requesting Investigation into Federal Judicial Center’s Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence

Nebraska Attorney General Mike Hilgers led a 22-State coalition in sending a letter to Congress that requests an investigation into how the Federal Judicial Center’s most recent “Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence” attempts to improperly influence federal proceedings regarding scientific issues. While the Reference Manual historically has described basic principles of science, the new Fourth Edition affirmatively takes a stance on major issues percolating in climate-related litigation. Such bias violates the courts’ fundamental commitment to fair and neutral adjudication. Congress should investigate how the Federal Judicial Center’s recent Manual came to include such blatant bias.

“I joined my colleagues in urging Chairman Jordan, Chairman Issa, and the House Judiciary Committee to expand their investigation into the Federal Judicial Center’s climate science chapter and its embrace of ideological policies. The Federal Judicial Center’s new science manual should present complex evidence fairly and impartially to judges. Still, instead, it appears to embed the views of climate activists and diversity, equity, and inclusion ideologues into what is presented as neutral guidance. When the same advocates and experts who are actively litigating climate cases help write and review a chapter that will be used by federal judges behind the scenes, it raises obvious and serious concerns about the impartiality of the judicial system. Nebraskans, and all Americans, deserve courts that are neutral and fair,” stated Attorney General Mike Hilgers.

Last week, Nebraska joined a letter from West Virginia to the Federal Judicial Center itself, urging the Center to conduct an internal investigation into how its Manual came to use biased authors and materials.

Nebraska was proud to lead the multistate coalition advocating for congressional investigation into judicial bias and will continue to stand against improper attempts to influence judges.