This week, Senator Ted Cruz chaired one of the most important hearings in the U.S. Senate has hosted in years: “Enter the Dragon—China and the Left’s Lawfare Against American Energy Dominance.” At a time when American energy producers are being targeted by a coordinated assault of litigation and foreign influence, this hearing was a long-overdue spotlight on the shadowy forces behind the war on domestic energy.
Cruz, who chairs the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Federal Courts, Oversight, Agency Action, and Federal Rights, is uniquely positioned to probe the abuses at the intersection of law, politics, and global competition. For years, progressive activists and their legal enablers have weaponized the court system to try to destroy U.S. oil and gas production—not through the democratic process, but through a barrage of climate lawsuits designed to shame and bankrupt companies that fuel the American economy.
At the center of this effort is Sher Edling, a for-profit law firm that has filed more than 20 lawsuits against energy companies on behalf of Democratic-led cities and states. Despite being in operation since 2016, the firm has never taken a climate case to trial—let alone won one. But that hasn’t stopped it from collecting millions in dark money through nonprofits like the New Venture Fund and the Tides Foundation. These suits aren’t about justice or protecting the environment—they’re about reputation destruction and political theater.
Worse still, Sher Edling’s litigation machine is being propped up by activist academics, foreign-linked donors, and ideological think tanks masquerading as neutral educators. One such group, the Environmental Law Institute (ELI), has provided “climate science” training to over 2,000 state and federal judges under the banner of its Climate Judiciary Project. This supposedly impartial education effort is anything but. The curriculum, created with input from activists and pro-litigation academics, is a Trojan horse for an ideological agenda—one that seeks to prime judges to favor plaintiffs in climate liability suits.
Senator Cruz has already demanded transparency from ELI, rightly questioning whether its training represents inappropriate attempts to influence judicial outcomes. ELI’s past leadership has direct ties to the climate litigation effort, and at least one of its board members has consulted for Sher Edling. These connections should concern anyone who believes in judicial impartiality and the proper role of courts in a democracy.
The lawfare doesn’t end with ELI. Progressive mega-donors, routed through 501(c)(3) entities like the Collective Action Fund, have funneled millions of dollars to Sher Edling to underwrite litigation costs. Because these are “charitable” contributions, they’re tax-deductible—meaning everyday Americans are subsidizing a political crusade to sue the energy industry out of existence. Among the funders? The Leonardo DiCaprio Foundation, the Hewlett Foundation, and other billionaire-backed climate outfits.
These efforts are not only legally unfounded; they also are failing. Courts across the country have dismissed climate lawsuits from New York City, New Jersey, and most recently Bucks County, Pennsylvania. In that case, Judge Stephen Corr wrote that the claims were “not judiciable,” echoing a growing chorus of judges who see through the attempt to dress up political activism as tort law.
Even so, the danger remains. If just one sympathetic judge lets one of these cases succeed, it could open the door to discovery abuse, reputational smears, and billions in extorted settlements. And if that judge happened to attend one of ELI’s briefings? The integrity of the judicial system would be thrown into serious question.
That’s why Senator Cruz’s recent hearing was so important. By scrutinizing the web of influence behind the climate litigation machine—from Sher Edling to ELI to foreign-linked donors—Cruz is doing more than defending domestic energy production. He’s defending the rule of law. He’s defending the idea that public policy decisions should be made by elected officials, not by activist lawyers funded by billionaires and foreign interests.
The American people have rejected the Green New Deal at the ballot box. They’ve rejected the idea of skyrocketing energy costs and forced dependence on Chinese-made solar panels and batteries. What the left couldn’t achieve through legislation, it is now trying to impose through litigation. That’s not justice—it’s lawfare.
Thanks to Senator Cruz, that lawfare is finally being exposed. Let’s hope the rest of Washington is paying attention.
The Honorable Tim Huelskamp represented Kansas’s 1st District in Congress from 2011 to 2017, chaired the House Tea Party Caucus, and was a member of the 2024 RNC Platform Committee