Skip to playerSkip to main contentSkip to footer
  • yesterday
At a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing last week, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) spoke about judges receiving education from advocacy groups.
Transcript
00:00of the Communist Party that's trying to take us down.
00:02Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
00:08And I would note one of the reasons why the left
00:11and the Chinese Communist resort to litigation
00:13is because their ideas are incredibly unpopular
00:17when the American people vote on them.
00:19So, for example, in the United States Senate,
00:22every Senate Democrat voted in favor of the California waiver
00:27that would effectively ban the internal combustion engine
00:31in 18 states across the country.
00:34Every Senate Democrat voted in favor of it, but you know what?
00:37The citizens aren't voting in favor of it.
00:40They're not campaigning.
00:41We don't see our Democrat colleagues saying
00:43we're going to ban the internal combustion engine.
00:46Even in bright blue states, even in Vermont and Rhode Island,
00:51the voters are not saying, take away the car out of my driveway.
00:54And yet, Democrat officeholders are trying to use government power
00:59to fight the Democrat wishes of their electorate.
01:03General Kobach, let's talk about the courts.
01:07The Climate Judiciary Project, backed by the Environmental Law Institute,
01:11Energy Foundation, and private donors connected to plaintiff's law firms,
01:15has trained over 2,000 judges, many in key jurisdictions
01:18where these climate cases are pending.
01:20Is it appropriate for sitting judges to receive climate science
01:25quote-unquote education from advocacy groups
01:30like the Environmental Law Institute,
01:32groups that are directly tied to the plaintiffs in active litigation?
01:38No, Mr. Chairman.
01:39I do not believe it is any more than it would be appropriate
01:42for a group of justices to go on an extensive training conference
01:48and be trained in how to dispute or defend the fossil fuel industry.
01:56When you have a group of litigants in a pitched legal battle
02:00in approximately three, well, more than three dozen cases,
02:03if we're talking about more than just the ones brought by cities and counties,
02:07the judges are there to be neutral.
02:09And the worst thing I fear going into any case on any issue
02:13is if I know that the judge has already dug in
02:16based on prior things the judge has done or said against me.
02:20So, you know, I don't think it's appropriate for litigants
02:23to be training the judges in essentially what their experts
02:27are going to say in the trial.
02:29Mr. Chairman, may I respond to this as well?
02:32No, because we've got limited time,
02:34if someone else wants to get into it.
02:36General Kobach, isn't it true that...
02:40Actually, go ahead, Mr. Arkush.
02:42Well, I just wanted to say that what Mr. Kobach is saying he opposes
02:46is exactly what's happening from the defense side as well.
02:49The Environmental Law Institute has multiple oil companies on its board,
02:54executives of oil companies, BP and Shell,
02:56and it has counsel representing them in court
03:01in important leadership positions.
03:04So we may be breaking news here.
03:06Are you on behalf of Public Citizen calling for the Environmental Law Institute
03:09to stop training judges and indoctrinating judges?
03:13What I'm saying is it doesn't make any sense to say
03:15that they're indoctrinating judges as some sort of leftist plot.
03:18Let's be clear.
03:19I'm calling for them to stop training judges
03:21because I think they are indoctrinating them.
03:24It's interesting you said that,
03:25but you weren't willing to go to the natural next step of,
03:28therefore, it should stop.
03:30I don't know much about it,
03:31but I do know that BP and Shell are on the board.
03:32Mr. Arkush,
03:34if you believed what you were saying,
03:37you would be willing to call for it to stop.
03:38You're not,
03:39and that suggests you know damn well
03:41what it is that they're training the judges,
03:43and it's indoctrination,
03:44and you don't want it to stop
03:45because you want the judges to be biased
03:47and rule in favor of these crackpot theories.
03:50Now, General Kobach,
03:52I disagree that BP and Shell are on the board of an organization
03:54that judges against them.
03:55Mr. Arkush,
03:56your time is done.
03:57Isn't it true that these programs,
03:59often hosted in conjunction
04:01with the Federal Judicial Center
04:02or the National Judicial College,
04:05can obscure ethics disclosure requirements
04:07because they fall under judicial exemption categories?
04:11Yeah, I think,
04:13Chairman,
04:13you're correct.
04:14There are definite ethical problems,
04:16and in addition to the overarching sort of federal model of ethics,
04:21you also have additional state ethical rules
04:23that may be violated as well.
04:24But, you know,
04:25at the end of the day,
04:27it's judicial neutrality
04:28that is the biggest ethical constraint
04:31on our entire Article III courts and state courts,
04:35and that is the biggest problem I see going into any case.
04:38It's also been reported
04:39that the Chief Justice of the Hawaii Supreme Court
04:42participated in these sessions
04:44at the same time that his court
04:46was reviewing one of these climate lawsuits.
04:48So active litigation
04:50and yet happily being indoctrinated
04:53by interested parties
04:54in an ex-parte setting
04:56where the opposing counsel
04:57had no opportunity
04:58to refute the indoctrination.
05:01Mr. Walter,
05:02the Climate Judiciary Project
05:04tells judges
05:05that climate lawsuits
05:06are a, quote,
05:07unique opportunity for accountability.
05:08Would you call that education
05:11or would you call that
05:12political indoctrination
05:13disguised as training?
05:15Accountability is the standard term
05:18used by political activists
05:19to try to say
05:20we want to hurt those folks
05:22that we're opposed to.
05:23Do you believe Congress
05:25should investigate
05:26whether these trainings
05:27are undermining
05:28the impartiality of the judiciary?
05:30Absolutely, Senator.
05:32Senator Whitehouse.
05:33Well, the funny thing
05:34about this conversation
05:35is that time did not begin

Recommended