Blog | Page 3 of 18 | Climate Science Legal Defense Fund
July 2, 2019

Workshop for Public Sector Scientists and Engineers: July 16 in NYC

Join us after work on Tuesday, July 16 for a workshop hosted by the Federal Workers Coalition of New York City. The "Know Your Rights" portion will be led by a lawyer from the Climate Science Legal Defense Fund and the "Workplace Organizing" portion will be led by an experienced union organizer from Labor Notes. 
March 19, 2019

New Publication: What to Expect When You’re an Expert Witness

Our newest educational resource, "What to Expect When You're an Expert Witness," is a guide that's intended to help scientists know what to expect—and what to safeguard against—when they agree to provide expert testimony to judges and juries.
March 6, 2019

New Publication: Advocating for Science in a Politicized Environment

Today we published a resource designed to help scientists from all disciplines understand U.S. anti-lobbying restrictions and other political laws, so they can safely and effectively advocate for the issues of importance to them.
December 6, 2018

New Resources Help Scientists Reduce their Risk of Harassing Attacks

Today we published two educational resources to help scientists safely and effectively speak up for science, and know what to do if they end up in political crosshairs. “Safeguarding Online Communications” is a practical guide to expressing one’s views and engaging in activism, while minimizing the risk of threats and attacks. And the new edition of “Handling Political Harassment and Legal Intimidation” has information about whistleblowing and participating in advocacy and activism.
November 27, 2018

Our Comments on the EPA’s Proposed Rule on Scientific Integrity

The Climate Science Legal Defense Fund filed comments on November 26 in support of a rule proposed by the EPA, which would require contractors who perform scientific work or provide scientific advice to the EPA to abide by the agency’s Scientific Integrity Policy. While we believe the proposed rule needs some adjustments and additions, overall we support it as a positive development for scientific integrity at the agency
Back to Top