The Trump administration discharged nearly 400 scientists and researchers involved in preparing the National Climate Assessment, raising concerns about the report's completion and trustworthiness, according to The New York Times. The scientists and experts were informed by email that the scope of the National Climate Assessment report was being reevaluated, and they were "now releasing all current assessment participants from their roles."
The National Climate Assessment is considered an authoritative document on climate change, prepared by about 400 volunteer authors, including top scientists, economists, tribal leaders, and climate experts. It provides a U.S.-specific examination of the global climate crisis, detailing how global warming impacts sectors of the economy, ecosystems, and communities, and reports on progress in addressing global warming. It is widely utilized by stakeholders such as city planners, farmers, judges, agencies, and policymakers for decision-making related to climate risks. It serves as the basis for federal, state, and local governments, as well as private companies, to prepare for climate change impacts and understand future projections of climate risk. The upcoming sixth edition of the National Climate Assessment (NCA6) was scheduled for publication in 2027, but its future is now uncertain due to the recent dismissals of scientists.
The report is legally required by Congress, and although its implementation is not mandatory, the assessments are essential tools for lawmakers, businesses, and local governments for planning climate resilience measures. The dismissal of these scientists effectively halted work on the sixth National Climate Assessment, putting its timely publication in doubt and obscuring scientific realities that contradict the administration's agenda.
"Today the Trump administration irrationally struck a critical and comprehensive American climate science report by firing its authors without justification," said Rachel Cleetus, a co-author of the report and representative at the Union of Concerned Scientists, according to New Scientist. She warned, "The effort to bury this report will not change the scientific facts, but without this information, there is a risk that our country will proceed blindly into a world that has become more dangerous due to human-caused climate change."
Jesse Keenan, a coauthor of the last assessment and a climate studies professor at Tulane University, told The New York Times, "This is as close as it gets to a termination of the assessment. If you get rid of all the people involved, nothing's moving forward." Katharine Hayhoe, a climate scientist at Texas Tech University, emphasized the importance of the assessment, saying, "It takes that global issue and brings it down to us. If I care about food, water, transportation, insurance, or my health, this is what climate change means to me if I live in the Southwest or the Great Plains. That's the value." She added, "Climate change puts us all at risk, and we all need this vital information to help prepare."
Earlier in the month, the Trump administration canceled a major contract with ICF International, a consulting firm that had been providing most of the technical and personnel support to the U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP). The USGCRP, established by Congress in 1990 and supported by NASA, oversees the process of creating the National Climate Assessment and coordinates the work of 13 federal agencies. The report undergoes several rounds of review by 14 federal agencies, in addition to a public comment period. However, this process was already facing serious disruptions under the Trump administration.
Bob Kopp, a climate scientist at Rutgers University and an author of the chapter on ocean coasts that was being prepared for the sixth report, expressed concern about the future of the assessment. He wrote on Bluesky, "I know many of the authors would like to find a way to ensure that Americans can still have an updated, evidence-based assessment of our country's climate." He noted, "Many of the authors would like to see an up-to-date evidence-based report."
Some scientists fear that the Trump administration may try to shut down the NationalClimate Assessment effort or write an entirely new report from scratch that minimizes the risks of rising temperatures or contradicts established climate science. Edward Carr stated that the report's cancellation is "another effort to erase the evidence on which serious policy debate can be constructed."
Cleetus called on Congress to "step up to ensure the report it requires by law is conducted with scientific integrity and delivered in a timely way." She added, "Lives will be lost. There will be harm caused by removing access to this federally funded, comprehensive scientific report." Ladd Keith, an associate professor of planning, remarked, "Losing this vital source of information will ultimately harm our nation's ability to address the impacts of climate change."
Chris Field, an author of previous climate assessment reports, expressed concern that if the next version is scrapped, the country would lose up-to-date and authoritative information from the federal government. He said, "It's as if, when you're driving your car, you have half the window blocked out, or your headlights don't work."
The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment regarding the dismissals. A spokesperson for NASA, which supports the National Climate Assessment, reiterated that the report's scope was being reevaluated but declined to comment further.
The article was written with the assistance of a news analysis system.