Trump called a federal judiciary climate science manual ‘Political Fraud and False Science’ and ordered a review of its use in federal court cases

President Donald Trump on Sunday called for a review connected to a scientific reference manual that federal judges use in cases involving climate change in a recent Truth Social post. Trump wrote that the manual contains “discredited” information that he claimed led to “huge losses” for the country.

“Our Nation’s Federal Judges deserve Facts and Science, not Political Fraud and False Science on Climate,” Trump wrote. He added, “With this TRUTH, I hereby order Federal Suspension and Debarment Officials to review this conduct.”

It was not immediately clear what “conduct” Trump wants investigated, and the White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment 

Judiciary had already withdrawn a climate chapter earlier this year

Earlier this year, the U.S. federal judiciary withdrew a chapter from the newest edition of its reference manual on scientific evidence, according to Reuters. That chapter had addressed climate change, and its removal came after Republican state attorneys general argued it was biased against fossil fuel companies.

The Federal Judicial Center, the judiciary’s research arm, had added a chapter on climate change as part of a long-planned update to the manual. The fourth edition of the manual was released in December. Judges reportedly rely on the manual when handling cases that involve scientific testimony.

The section in question was part of the fourth edition of the Federal Judicial Center’s Reference Manual for Scientific Evidence. It was written by Jessica Wentz and Radley Horton of Columbia Law School. The chapter was drafted to help judges “evaluate the admissibility and weight of expert testimony and documentary evidence involving climate science.”

The Federal Judicial Center produced the manual jointly with the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.

Trump’s Sunday post did not specify which federal officials or agencies he expects to carry out the review, nor did it clarify what actions, if any, might follow.  The dispute over the climate chapter stems from objections raised by Republican state attorneys general earlier this year. 

Those officials argued that the chapter’s content was biased against fossil fuel companies, which led to its withdrawal from the manual. Similar judicial pushback has occurred in other areas, like a federal judge striking down a Trump administration voter citizenship database.

Reuters’ report did not include additional comment from the Federal Judicial Center, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, or the chapter’s authors regarding Trump’s Sunday post.

Reuters also did not report any response from Wentz or Horton, the Columbia Law School professors credited with authoring the withdrawn section. In another judicial setback for the President, a federal judge recently struck down a fee he imposed on H-1B visas.