WASHINGTON D.C. – A coalition of prominent environmental groups has filed a federal lawsuit against the Trump administration, challenging the legality of a climate report they allege was secretly produced by a team of “known climate contrarians” to dispute the scientific consensus on global warming.

The lawsuit, filed on Friday, claims the report was assembled outside of standard scientific review processes and represents a deliberate effort to sideline the work of federal scientists. The legal action escalates the ongoing conflict between the scientific community and an administration that has consistently sought to roll back environmental regulations and question the severity of climate change.

At the heart of the dispute is a report commissioned by Energy Secretary Chris Wright. According to documents cited in the lawsuit and first reported by CBS News, Secretary Wright selected a small group of individuals with well-documented histories of skepticism toward mainstream climate science to author the assessment.

Allegations of Secrecy and Undue Influence

The plaintiffs, which include the Center for Environmental Integrity and the Union of Concerned Scientists, argue that the administration violated federal law by creating what they term a “shadow” scientific body. They contend that by circumventing the rigorous, peer-reviewed process used for official government assessments like the National Climate Assessment, the administration is attempting to create a pretext for policies that ignore the climate crisis.

“This is not about fostering a healthy scientific debate; it is a clandestine effort to manufacture doubt and provide political cover for inaction,” said Maria Rodriguez, lead counsel for the plaintiffs, in a statement released Saturday. “Government-sponsored science must be transparent and credible. This report is neither.”

The lawsuit further alleges that the administration has engaged in a pattern of undermining climate science, citing reduced funding for climate research programs and the dismissal of several scientists who contributed to previous National Climate Assessments.

A Controversial Panel

The report’s authors, while not all officially named in the initial filing, are described as individuals who have long challenged the findings of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and other leading scientific bodies. Their involvement has drawn sharp criticism from independent researchers and academic institutions.

Dr. Anjali Sharma, a climatologist at Stanford University who is not involved in the lawsuit, called the development "deeply troubling." In an interview, she stated, "The strength of a scientific assessment comes from its transparency, its reliance on a vast body of peer-reviewed evidence, and its ability to withstand scrutiny from a wide range of experts. Creating a small, ideologically aligned team to produce a counter-report is a political exercise, not a scientific one."

The White House and the Department of Energy have not yet issued a formal response to the lawsuit. However, administration officials have previously defended their approach to climate science, arguing for the inclusion of what they call “diverse perspectives” to challenge established scientific orthodoxy.

The Broader Implications for U.S. Climate Policy

The legal battle comes at a critical time for U.S. climate policy. The National Climate Assessment, which is mandated by Congress, serves as the authoritative foundation for regulations and planning across federal agencies. Critics of the administration fear that the new, unsanctioned report could be used to justify weakening emissions standards, withdrawing from international climate commitments, and halting federal adaptation initiatives.

The outcome of this lawsuit could set a significant precedent for how scientific information is developed and used within the U.S. government. It will test the legal guardrails intended to protect federal scientific processes from political interference. For now, the scientific and environmental communities are watching closely as the case prepares to move through the courts, a process that could have lasting implications for the nation's response to a warming planet.