Attorney General of Virginia's climate science investigation

The Attorney General of Virginia's climate science investigation was a civil fraud investigation of five research grant applications by former University of Virginia professor Michael E. Mann, initiated in April 2010 by Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli and dismissed by the Judge Paul Peatross in August.^[1] Cuccinelli's investigation followed the theft and online publication of thousands of emails and other documents from a server at the Climatic Research Unit of the University of East Anglia in the United Kingdom, in the Climatic Research Unit email controversy. Cuccinelli issued a demand to the University of Virginia to turn over a wide range of records relating to work done by one of its former faculty members, Professor Michael E. Mann, a leading climate scientist whose emails were among those highlighted in the controversy. The demand was issued under the Virginia Fraud Against Taxpayers Act in connection with claims by Cuccinnelli that Mann had possibly violated state fraud laws in relation to five research grants, by allegedly manipulating data. No evidence of wrongdoing was presented to support the claim,^[2][3] and a July 2010 investigation by Mann's present employer, Pennsylvania State University, later cleared Mann of charges that he falsified or suppressed data.

Cuccinelli's actions raised concerns about a potential threat to academic freedom. The University of Virginia's faculty and numerous scientists and science organizations expressed particular concern. After initially suggesting that they would comply, university officials decided to contest Cuccinelli's demand and asked a state court to dismiss it as "fundamentally legally flawed", not least because four of the five grants were federal and one preceded the state's 2003 Virginia Fraud Against Taxpayers Act. In exchanges with the university over the demand, which the ACLU of Virginia called "hard to conceive of ... as anything but a "fishing expedition", a brief from Cuccinelli asserted that Mann and other scientists had manipulated scientific conclusions to produce results that could be used to support the regulation of carbon dioxide. Cuccinelli, elected Attorney General in January 2010, had filed suit a month later seeking to overturn a finding of the United States Environmental Protection Agency that greenhouse gases endanger public health.

Judge Paul Peatross Jr. ruled that Cuccinelli and his staff failed to demonstrate that an investigation was warranted, ruling that "The nature of the conduct is not stated so that any reasonable person could glean what Dr. Mann did to violate the statute...The Court…understands the controversy regarding Dr. Mann’s work on the issue of global warming. However, it is not clear what he did that was misleading, false or fraudulent in obtaining funds from the Commonwealth of Virginia." ^[1] Mann called the ruling a victory "for all scientists who live in fear that they may be subject to a politically-motivated witch hunt when their research findings prove inconvenient to powerful vested interests."^[4] Cuccinelli responded to the ruling by stating that he is considering an appeal of parts of the ruling and will make a new demand for documents that satisfies the judge's ruling.

Background

Main article: Climatic Research Unit email controversy

In November 2009 a large number of documents and emails were taken without authorization from the University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit, apparently through hacking, and posted on the Internet.^[5] The vast majority of the emails were either sent to or received by four climate scientists, including Michael E. Mann of Pennsylvania State University (PSU).^[6]

The e-mails prompted a major controversy and five separate inquiries – three in the United Kingdom focusing on the Climatic Research Unit and two internal PSU investigations concerning Mann's work. PSU's final investigation report concluded that "there is no substance" to the allegations against Mann, although the report chastised as "careless and inappropriate" Mann's actions in sharing unpublished manuscripts with third parties.^[7]

The final PSU report was well-received among scientists and academics, including Roger Jones of the University of Victoria.^[8][9] Francesca Grifo of the Union of Concerned Scientists said the Penn State report "shows that universities and scientists have effective systems in place to police themselves."^[10] Former Republican congressman Sherwood Boehlert of the environmental advocacy coalition Project on Climate Science called the PSU report "a welcome return to common sense" in the face of "a manufactured distraction".^[11]

The PSU report received criticism by media commentators and the climate scientist Patrick Michaels of the Cato Institute.^[12][13][14] Josh Roskam of the Australian think-tank Institute of Public Affairs remarked "The reviews did not answer the questions about why data was missing; why data was not shared; why there hasn't been a full and open, transparent process."^[8] Republican Representative Darrell Issa claimed that the PSU report called into question Mann's work."^[15]

Mann taught at the University of Virginia (U.Va.), in the Department of Environmental Sciences, between 1999 and 2005. He became the Director of the PSU's interdepartmental Earth System Science Center in 2005.^[16] His pioneering work^[17] on the temperature record of the past 1000 years, which was featured in the 2001 Third Assessment Report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, has received wide attention^[18] but has been the subject of some controversy.^[19]

In January 2010, Ken Cuccinelli took office as Virginia's new Attorney General. He is a conservative Republican and global warming skeptic^[19] who has become a leading national voice in alleging that the evidence of global warming has been skewed by scientists.^[20] The following month he filed suit seeking to overturn a finding of the United States Environmental Protection Agency that greenhouse gases endanger public health.^[21]

Investigation and initial reaction

Cuccinelli's office issued a formal civil investigative demand to U.Va. on April 23, 2010^[22] seeking a wide range of records relating to Mann's work at the university, in connection with an investigation into "possible violations" by Mann of the Virginia Fraud Against Taxpayers Act. Brian Gottstein, a spokesman for Cuccinelli, asserted that the Climatic Research Unit emails "indicate that some climate data may have been deliberately manipulated to arrive at pre-set conclusions" and the use of such data to apply for taxpayer-funded grants could constitute fraud.^[23]

The demand asked for all data and materials presented by Mann between 1999 and 2005 when he applied for five publicly funded research grants,^[24] four of which were awarded by federal agencies, with a total value of $466,000. In addition, Attorney General Cuccinelli sought data, materials, and communications that he created, presented, or made in connection with those grants.^[24] It also demanded that U.Va. produce all correspondence or e-mails between Mann and 39 other scientists since 1999. A deadline of May 27, 2010 was set for the material to be turned over. The civil investigative demand was equivalent to a subpoena but did not require the Attorney General to file a lawsuit or to obtain the intervention or permission of a court so that he could make the demand.^[20]

Cuccinelli's demand prompted an outcry about the case's threat to academic freedom.^[25] Mann said that he believed that Cuccinelli was "simply trying to smear me as part of a larger campaign to discredit my science".^[20] Nineteen professors at Virginia's Old Dominion University issued a statement saying that Cuccinelli's actions "echo some of the worst offenses of the McCarthy era", alluding to the anti-Communist investigations of Senator Joseph McCarthy in the 1950s. They demanded that he "cease and desist from this and further 'witch hunts' driven by partisan political agendas that waste valuable state resources in a difficult economy."^[26] U.Va.'s Faculty Senate issued a statement^[24] criticizing the investigation as being politically motivated and "an inappropriate way to engage with the process of scientific inquiry" which "directly threaten[s] academic freedom" by "send[ing] a chilling message to scientists engaged in basic research involving Earth's climate and indeed to scholars in any discipline."^[24]

Eight hundred university faculty members across the US signed a petition organized by the Union of Concerned Scientists, which said in a statement: "Much of Virginia's scientific and academic community is appalled that their attorney general has launched such a blatantly political investigation." The American Civil Liberties Union of Virginia and the American Association of University Professors also criticized Cuccinelli's actions,^[23] commenting in a joint letter that "it is hard to conceive of the Attorney General's request ... as anything but a "fishing expedition" aimed at discrediting Dr. Mann's conclusions, rather than pursuing any reasonable suspicions of malfeasance."^[27] A statement by the directors of the American Association for the Advancement of Science said that "scientists should not be subjected to fraud investigations simply for providing scientific results that may be controversial or inconvenient" and that investigations such as those Cuccinelli has initiated against Mann "could have a long-lasting and chilling effect on a broad spectrum of research fields that are critical to a range of national interests from public health to national security to the environment."^[28]

The science journal Nature published an editorial describing the investigation as "an ideologically motivated inquisition that harasses and intimidates climate scientists" and noted it had been condemned even by climate change skeptics.^[3][29] Chip Knappenberger, assistant to global warming skeptic Patrick Michaels, said just as he "didn't like it when the politicians came after Pat Michaels," he "[doesn't] like it that the politicians are coming after Mike Mann."^[30] The Washington Post said in an editorial that Cuccinelli had "declared war on the freedom of academic inquiry" and that he had demonstrated "a dangerous disregard for scientific method and academic freedom."^[31] In a subsequent editorial the newspaper applauded U.Va's decision to resist the demand and highlighted the potential cost of the precedent being set by Cuccinelli, noting that "if researchers at state institutions are unwilling to stick their necks out in case a state official dislikes their findings, scientific progress at the commonwealth's universities will screech to a halt, talented faculty will leave, and the best and brightest students will go elsewhere."^[32]

May–August 2010 Litigation

Although U.Va. officials initially said that they would comply with Cuccinelli's demand, many scientists urged the university to resist. On May 27 U.Va. filed a petition with Albemarle County Circuit Court asking a judge to dismiss Cuccinelli's demand. The university argued that Cuccinelli had issued a vague, non-specific demand that exceeded his statutory authority: "Investigating the merits of a university researcher's methodology, results and conclusions (on climate change or any topic) goes far beyond the Attorney General's limited statutory power". The petition connected Cuccinelli's actions with his ongoing litigation about federal environmental policy and regulation.^[33] It argued in a subsequent brief that the demand was "fundamentally legally flawed".^[25]

Cuccinelli filed a brief in response insisting that he had a right to demand climate change records, arguing that "neither academic freedom nor the First Amendment have ever been held to immunize a person, whether an academic or not, from civil or criminal actions for fraud, let alone immunized them from an otherwise authorized investigation."^[34] A follow-up brief again asserted Cuccinelli's authority and questioned Mann's scientific findings,^[35] asserting that Mann and other scientists had manipulated scientific conclusions to produce results that could be used to support the regulation of carbon dioxide.^[36]

U.Va. responded by questioning Cuccinelli's motives, stating that his demand was "aimed squarely at Dr. Mann's scientific conclusions" and that more than a third of the attorney general's brief "is devoted to challenging and criticizing the research and conclusions of Dr. Mann and his co-authors." The University argued that given the importance of protecting academic freedom the court should not permit the attorney general to exceed his statutory power, and that "such a potentially invasive investigative tool should not be permitted to be used to target academics merely because the Attorney General disputes the legitimacy of their research and conclusions."^[19] It noted that four of the grants queried by Cuccinelli were received from the federal government and were therefore not covered by the Virginia Fraud Against Taxpayers Act, while the fifth was awarded before the statute was enacted in 2003. U.Va. argued that much of the information demanded by Cuccinelli had nothing to do with any of the five grants and was "not even remotely tailored to an investigation of a potential [fraud statute] investigation."^[37] The presiding judge, Cheryl V. Higgins, agreed to stay Cuccinelli's demand pending further oral hearings due to take place in late August.^[38]

On August 20, 2010, Albermarle Circuit Court Judge Paul Peatross heard argument on when Cuccinelli should get the requested data, including emails between Mann and his research assistants, secretaries and 39 other scientists across the country.^[39] On August 30, 2010, the judge ruled that while the Virginia Attorney General could investigate state grants awarded to scientists, Cuccinelli and his staff failed to demonstrate that such an investigation was warranted in this case. "The nature of the conduct is not stated so that any reasonable person could glean what Dr. Mann did to violate the statute," the judge wrote, "...The Court...understands the controversy regarding Dr. Mann's work on the issue of global warming. However, it is not clear what he did that was misleading, false or fraudulent in obtaining funds from the Commonwealth of Virginia."^[40] At this point, Cuccinelli can either rewrite the civil investigative demand or appeal the decision.^[41][42][43]

Ongoing Litigation

On September 29, 2010, Cuccinelli filed a revised CID in order to address some of the shortcomings identified in the August 30th ruling. The main changes were narrowing the case to the only one of the five original grants which was not a federal grant and stating the specific allegation of fraud: "Specifically, but without limitation, some of the conclusions of the papers demonstrate a complete lack of rigor regarding the statistical analysis of the alleged data, meaning that the result reported lacked statistical significance without a specific statement to that effect." The University of Virginia has indicated that it intends to fight the request.^[44]

On October 20, 2010, the University of Virginia filed papers requesting that Cuccinelli’s latest demand be “set aside” as well. UVa’s lawyers point out that Cuccinelli’s latest CID recites verbatim the first 15 pages of the attorney general’s brief in opposition to UVa’s petition to dismiss the previous CIDs. The text, they say, has already been considered by the court and “found deficient.” ^[45]

In March, 2011, the Supreme Court of Virginia decided to hear Cuccinelli's appeal.^[46] Both sides are expected to file legal briefs outlining their cases this spring, and a hearing will be held at some point after those documents are received.^[47]

See also

• Hockey stick controversy

External links

University of Virginia

• Petition To Set Aside Civil Investigative Demands Issued to the University of Virginia, May 27, 2010
• Brief in Support of Petition to Set Aside Civil Investigative Demands Issued to the University of Virginia, June 29, 2010
• Exhibits to Brief in Support of Petition to Set Aside Civil Investigative Demands, June 29, 2010
• Reply Brief in Support of Petition to Set Aside Civil Investigative Demands Issued to the University of Virginia, July 20, 2010

Attorney General of Virginia

• Answer to University of Virginia Petition, June 11, 2010
• Brief in Opposition to Petition, July 13, 2010

Court Decision

• Order setting aside the CID August 30, 2010

References

1. ^ ^{a b} http://www.ucsusa.org/news/press_release/judge-dismisses-ken-cuccinelli-mann-0437.html
2. ^ "no evidence of wrongdoing was given to explain invoking the law, which is intended to prosecute individuals who make false claims in order to access government funds." - Nature editorial, 13 May 2010
3. ^ ^{a b} Editor (2010-05-13). "Science subpoenaed". Nature (Nature Publishing Group) 465 (7295): 135–136. doi:10.1038/465135b. ISSN 0028-0836. OCLC 1586310. PMID 20463694. http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v465/n7295/full/465135b.html. Retrieved 2010-07-30. 
4. ^ http://www.roanoke.com/news/breaking/wb/258716
5. ^ Eilperin, Juliet (2009-11-21). "Hackers steal electronic data from top climate research center". WashingtonPost.com (Washington, DC: Washington Post). ISSN 0190-8286. OCLC 2269358. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/20/AR2009112004093.html. Retrieved 2010-07-30. 
6. ^ Arthur, Charles (2010-02-05). "Hacking into the mind of the CRU climate change hacker". Guardian.co.uk (London, UK: The Guardian). ISSN 0261-3077. OCLC 60623878. http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2010/feb/05/cru-climate-change-hacker. Retrieved 2010-07-30. 
7. ^ "RA-10 Final Investigation Report Involving Dr. Michael E. Mann" (PDF). Pennsylvania State University. 2010-06-04. http://live.psu.edu/fullimg/userpics/10026/Final_Investigation_Report.pdf. Retrieved 2010-07-30. 
8. ^ ^{a b} Donovan, Samantha (2010-07-02). "'Climategate' scientist cleared by US university". ABC.net.au (Melbourne, Oz: ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)). OCLC 271540708. http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/07/02/2943806.htm. Retrieved 2010-07-30. 
9. ^ "Second University Review Clears Climate Scientist". WSJ.com. Associated Press. 2010-07-02. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704293604575342922512971004.html. Retrieved 2010-07-30. ^{[dead link]}
10. ^ Cooper, Charles (July 1, 2010). "Mann, Nobel-Winning Climate Scientist, Cleared of Wrongdoing". CBS News. http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-501465_162-20009478-501465.html. Retrieved 30 July 2010. 
11. ^ Eilperin, Juliet (2010-07-01). "Penn State clears Mann in Climate-gate probe". WashingtonPost.com (Washington, DC: Washington Post). ISSN 0190-8286. OCLC 2269358. http://views.washingtonpost.com/climate-change/post-carbon/2010/07/by_juliet_eilperin_a_pennsylvania.html. Retrieved 2010-07-30. 
12. ^ "Patrick J. Michaels". http://www.cato.org/people/patrick-michaels. Retrieved 31 July 2010. 
13. ^ Pat Michaels (July 12, 2010). "The Climategate Whitewash Continues". The Wall Street Journal. http://online.wsj.com/article/NA_WSJ_PUB:SB10001424052748704075604575356611173414140.html. Retrieved 28 July 2010. 
14. ^ Clive Crook (July 14, 2010). "Climategate and the Big Green Lie". The Atlantic. http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2010/07/climategate-and-the-big-green-lie/59709/. Retrieved 29 July 2010. "The Penn State inquiry exonerating Michael Mann–the paleoclimatologist who came up with "the hockey stick"–would be difficult to parody." 
15. ^ Ed Barnes (February 5, 2010). "Penn State Probe into Mann's Wrongdoing a 'Total Whitewash'". Fox News. http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/02/05/penn-state-probe-michael-mann-total-whitewash/. Retrieved 29 July 2010. "It was set up to be a total whitewash and the panel made no effort to investigate" 
16. ^ "Curriculum Vitae for Michael E. Mann". Pennsylvania State University. http://www.meteo.psu.edu/~mann/Mann/cv/cv.html. Retrieved 2010-07-28. 
17. ^ Schiermeier, Quirin (2005-02-10). "Past climate comes into focus but warm forecast stays put". Nature (Nature Publishing Group) 433 (7026): 562–563. doi:10.1038/433562a. ISSN 0028-0836. OCLC 1586310. PMID 15703712. http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v433/n7026/full/433562a.html. Retrieved 2010-07-31. 
18. ^ Committee on Surface Temperature Reconstructions for the Last 2,000 Years (2006). Surface Temperature Reconstructions for the Last 2,000 Years. National Academy of Sciences. p. 111. ISBN 0309102251. 
19. ^ ^{a b c} O'Dell, Larry (2010-07-20). "U.Va. questions Cuccinelli's motive in fraud investigation". HamptonRoads.com. Associated Press (Virginian-Pilot). http://hamptonroads.com/2010/07/uva-questions-cuccinellis-motive-fraud-investigation. Retrieved 2010-07-30. 
20. ^ ^{a b c} Helderman, Rosalind S. (2010-05-04). "State attorney general demands ex-professor's files from University of Virginia". WashingtonPost.com (Washington, DC: Washington Post). ISSN 0190-8286. OCLC 2269358. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/03/AR2010050304139.html. Retrieved 2010-07-30. 
21. ^ "Cuccinelli Petitions EPA and Files for Judicial Review" (Press release). Commonwealth of Virginia, Office of the Attorney General. 2010-02-17. http://www.oag.state.va.us/PRESS_RELEASES/Cuccinelli/21710_Attorney_General%20Petitions%20EPA.html. Retrieved 2010-07-30. 
22. ^ Walker, Julian (2010-05-04). "Cuccinelli investigates 'Climategate' scientist". HamptonRoads.com (Richmond, VA: Virginian-Pilot). OCLC 7353601. http://hamptonroads.com/2010/05/cuccinelli-investigates-climategate-scientist. Retrieved 2010-07-30. 
23. ^ ^{a b} Walker, Julian (2010-05-19). "Academics fight Cuccinelli's call for climate-change records". HamptonRoads.com (Richmond, VA: Virginian-Pilot). OCLC 7353601. http://hamptonroads.com/2010/05/academics-fight-cuccinellis-call-climatechange-records. Retrieved 2010-07-30. 
24. ^ ^{a b c d} Hamric, Ann B.; University of Virginia Faculty Senate Executive Council (2010-05-05). "Position Statement on Attorney General’s Investigation of Dr. Michael Mann" (PDF). Virginia.edu. University of Virginia. http://www.virginia.edu/facultysenate/documents/PositionStatementonMannInvestigation.pdf. Retrieved 2010-07-30. 
25. ^ ^{a b} Walker, Julian (2010-06-29). "U.Va. court filing: Cuccinell records demand 'fundamentally legally flawed'". HamptonRoads.com (Richmond, VA: Virginian-Pilot). OCLC 7353601. http://hamptonroads.com/2010/06/uva-court-filing-cuccinell-records-demand-fundamentally-legally-flawed. Retrieved 2010-07-30. 
26. ^ Walker, Julian; Walzer, Philip (2010-05-08). "ODU professors balk at Cuccinelli's climate request". HamptonRoads.com (Richmond, VA: Virginian-Pilot). OCLC 7353601. http://hamptonroads.com/2010/05/odu-professors-balk-cuccinellis-climate-request. 
27. ^ "Joint letter to the Rector and Visitors of the University of Virginia". ACLU of Virginia & American Association of University Professors. May 6, 2010. http://www.aaup.org/NR/rdonlyres/E79B03E1-7EB9-4B13-B8DA-4324E2928CB7/0/Wynneletter.pdf. 
28. ^ "Statement of the AAAS Board Of Directors Concerning the Virginia Attorney General’s Investigation of Prof. Michael Mann’s Work While on the Faculty of University of Virginia" (PDF). AAAS. 2010-05-18. http://www.aaas.org/news/releases/2010/media/0518board_statement_cuccinelli.pdf. Retrieved 2010-07-30. 
29. ^ Gentile, Sal. "Climate scientist calls Va. attorney general’s fraud probe ‘harassment’". PBS.org (PBS). http://www.pbs.org/wnet/need-to-know/environment/climate-scientist-says-va-attorney-generals-fraud-probe-is-harassment/3080/. Retrieved 2010-09-07. 
30. ^ "Oh, Mann: Cuccinelli targets UVA papers in Climategate salvo | The Hook News Blog". Readthehook.com. http://www.readthehook.com/blog/index.php/2010/04/29/oh-mann-cuccinelli-targets-uva-papers-in-climategate-salvo/. Retrieved 2010-07-30. 
31. ^ Editor (2010-05-07). "U-Va. should fight Cuccinelli's faulty investigation of Michael Mann". WashingtonPost.com (Washington, DC: Washington Post). ISSN 0190-8286. OCLC 2269358. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/06/AR2010050605936.html. Retrieved 2010-07-30. 
32. ^ "U-Va. admirably resists Mr. Cuccinelli's fishing expedition". Washington Post. May 29, 2010. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/28/AR2010052804517.html?nav=rss_opinions. 
33. ^ Walker, Julian (2010-05-28). "U.Va. fights subpoena of climate-change research". HamptonRoads.com (Richmond, VA: Virginian-Pilot). OCLC 7353601. http://hamptonroads.com/2010/05/uva-seeks-dismissal-subpoena-climatechange-research. Retrieved 2010-07-30. 
34. ^ Walker, Julian (2010-06-19). "Cuccinelli renews call for professor's climate data". HamptonRoads.com (Richmond, VA: Virginian-Pilot). OCLC 7353601. http://hamptonroads.com/2010/06/cuccinelli-renews-call-professors-climate-data. Retrieved 2010-07-30. 
35. ^ Walker, Julian (2010-07-13). "In response to U.Va., Cuccinelli insists he has right to records". HamptonRoads.com (Richmond, VA: Virginian-Pilot). OCLC 7353601. http://hamptonroads.com/2010/07/cuccinelli-responds-uva-motion-insists-he. Retrieved 2010-07-30. 
36. ^ Helderman, Rosalind S. (2010-07-20). "U.Va.: Cuccinelli brief an 'editorial screed' that proves he's targeting academic". WashingtonPost.com (Washington, DC: Washington Post). ISSN 0190-8286. OCLC 2269358. http://voices.washingtonpost.com/virginiapolitics/2010/07/uva_cuccinelli_brief_an_editor.html. Retrieved 2010-07-30. 
37. ^ Helderman, Rosalind S. (2010-06-29). "U.Va. says Cuccinelli subpoena a sweeping demand that will imperil academia". WashingtonPost.com (Washington, DC: Washington Post). ISSN 0190-8286. OCLC 2269358. http://voices.washingtonpost.com/virginiapolitics/2010/06/the_university_of_virginia_tol.html. Retrieved 2010-07-30. 
38. ^ Helderman, Rosalind S. (2010-06-22). "Judge stays Cuccinelli's U-Va. climate change subpoena, sets Aug. 20 court date". WashingtonPost.com (Washington, DC: Washington Post). ISSN 0190-8286. OCLC 2269358. http://voices.washingtonpost.com/virginiapolitics/2010/06/an_albermarle_county_judge_has.html. Retrieved 2010-07-30. 
39. ^ Kumar, Anita (August 21, 2010). "Judge to rule on Cuccinelli probe of climate study". Washington Post: p. B1. 
40. ^ Ruling. Retrieved 2010-08-31.
41. ^ Helderman, Rosalind (August 31, 2010). "Judge rejects Cuccinelli's probe of U-Va.". Washington Post: p. B1. 
42. ^ Sluss, Michael (August 30, 2010). "Judge denies Cuccinelli's demand for climate scientist's records; AG not backing down". Roanoke Times. http://www.roanoke.com/news/breaking/wb/258716. Retrieved 2010-08-31. 
43. ^ http://www2.dailyprogress.com/news/2010/aug/30/judge-sides-uva-climate-case-dismissing-cuccinelli-ar-479678/
44. ^ Helderman, Rosalind (October 5, 2010). "Virginia fight over climate documents will continue". Washington Post. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/04/AR2010100406825.html. Retrieved 2010-10-09. 
45. ^ McNeil, Brian (October 21, 2010). "UVa seeks dismissal of Cuccinelli's latest demand". Madison News. http://www2.madison-news.com/news/mce-news/2010/oct/21/uva-seeks-dismissal-cuccinellis-latest-demand-ar-577737. Retrieved 2010-10-24. 
46. ^ Strong, Ted (March 12, 2010). "Va. Supreme Court agrees to hear Cuccinelli climate-change case". WSLS News. http://www2.wsls.com/news/2011/mar/12/tdmet02-va-supreme-court-agrees-to-hear-cuccinelli-ar-900621/. Retrieved 2011-03-26. 
47. ^ Helderman, Rosalind (11 March 2011). "Va. Supreme Court will hear U-Va. global warming case". The Washington Post. http://voices.washingtonpost.com/virginiapolitics/2011/03/va_supreme_court_will_hear_u-v.html. Retrieved 26 March 2011.