EPA Employees Told They Can No Longer Attend Some Open Bar Events
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has found itself caught in the crossfire of a familiar battle—one that pits bureaucratic routine against shifting political winds. And at the center of the latest storm? An open bar.
Under the Trump administration, EPA Deputy Administrator David Fotouhi issued a directive effectively severing the agency’s ties with the Environmental Law Institute (ELI)—a nonprofit known for its legal training programs, policy forums, and, yes, events that sometimes include free drinks. The memo instructed EPA employees to stop engaging with the organization, citing concerns that have been echoed by Republican lawmakers and state attorneys general.
I’m dying.
“An EPA employee, granted anonymity because they fear retaliation, said barring staff from going to ELI events was part of
the administration’s attack on climate science.“If by “climate science” she means “law-firm-paid-for open bars,” then yes.
Attack. pic.twitter.com/dVGsep9a7N
— Matt Whitlock (@mattdizwhitlock) September 26, 2025
Why the sudden cold shoulder toward an institute that’s been operating for over 50 years? The issue, according to GOP critics, is that the ELI has blurred the lines between education and activism.
Their climate science courses for judges have come under particular fire, with opponents arguing that these sessions aren’t just informative—they’re ideologically driven. Critics claim that ELI’s content leans heavily on one-sided narratives of climate change, encouraging judicial decisions aligned more with political dogma than legal neutrality.
Reminder: the “Environmental Law Institute” and their “Climate Judiciary Project” has been found taking left-wing dark money to try and influence judges to rule against oil and gas companies to “fight climate change” and push left-wing nonsense in their courts. pic.twitter.com/Y7IY3R9P3h
— Matt Whitlock (@mattdizwhitlock) September 26, 2025
Defenders of the ELI see the move as an attack on scientific literacy, accusing the Trump administration of waging war on truth itself. But that framing oversimplifies what’s really a broader—and more interesting—debate: When does education become influence? And who gets to decide when scientific consensus is being used responsibly, rather than ideologically?
In fact, I did vote for this. https://t.co/xzBu3Lh9Qe
— Hunter Biden’s Life Coach (@Dave_AllRighty) September 26, 2025
Of course, the optics of this controversy are easy pickings for pundits. “EPA blocks staff from open bar events hosted by climate lawyers” makes for juicy headlines, even if it skirts the deeper question of what role outside organizations should play in shaping how public officials understand and enforce environmental law.