Trump climate panel not exempt from transparency requirements, judge rules

By Nate Raymond

Sept 17 (Reuters) - A group of climate change skeptics the Trump administration convened behind closed doors to prepare a report that became a linchpin for its efforts to roll back rules on greenhouse gas emissions is not exempt from a law mandating that committees that advise agencies be transparent, a federal judge ruled on Wednesday.

U.S. District Judge William Young in Boston sided with two environmental groups in rejecting arguments by President Donald Trump's administration that the work undertaken by the group convened by Energy Secretary Chris Wright fell outside the strict mandates of the Federal Advisory Committee Act.

The judge said he would discuss next steps in the case at a September 23 hearing. The plaintiffs have sought to bar the Environmental Protection Agency from relying on the working group's report and are seeking documents related to the group, which Young declined to order produced at this time.

“The law requires that such advisory committees act with transparency, public participation, and consideration of balanced perspectives," Erin Murphy, a lawyer with the plaintiff Environmental Defense Fund, said.

The Energy Department and Environmental Protection Agency did not respond to requests for comment.

The Environmental Defense Fund and the Union of Concerned Scientists sued last month, arguing the recently disbanded Climate Working Group unlawfully operated in secret to prepare a report the EPA relied on to reverse a key determination from 2009 that greenhouse gas emissions endanger public health.

Reversal of the "endangerment finding" would remove the legal foundation that underpins all major federal climate change regulations targeting vehicles, industries, and energy-producing facilities that emit heat-trapping greenhouse gases.

Trump set his sights on undoing the endangerment finding upon his return to the White House in January. In March, Wright convened the five-member working group, which was composed of critics of climate science, in secret, according to the plaintiffs.

Its existence was not publicly disclosed when the Department of Energy released the report it drafted on July 29, the same day the EPA formally proposed a rule that would rescind the endangerment finding.

The plaintiffs argued the working group constituted the type of panel that falls under the Federal Advisory Committee Act, which sets forth open meeting requirements for advisory committees and requires them to make public various records including transcripts, minutes and studies.

The Trump administration countered that it fell within an exception to that law that allows for assembling groups to "exchange facts or information with a Federal official."

But Young disagreed, saying the report the working group drafted was no mere review of the scientific literature on climate change but one that made clear recommendations in favor of an approach that "acknowledges both the potential risks and benefits of CO2."

"No reasonable jury could find that these words, arranged as they are, do not constitute advice or recommendations for a renewed approach to climate policy," Young, an appointee of Republican President Ronald Reagan, wrote.

The case is Environmental Defense Fund v. Wright, U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, No. 1:25-cv-12249.

For the plaintiffs: Erin Murphy of the Environmental Defense Fund

For the United States: Andrew Rising of the U.S. Department of Justice

Read more;

Groups sue Trump agencies for using 'secret' report to reverse core of US climate rules