A national security advocacy group is urging Congress to initiate an investigation into a prominent environmental law nonprofit, citing its historical partnerships and program connections with organizations allegedly tied to the Chinese government. This call to action was detailed in a report submitted to lawmakers on Tuesday by State Armor, a national security organization.
The Environmental Law Institute (ELI) has educated over 2,000 American judges on environmental law through its Climate Judiciary Project, an initiative active since 2018. Over several decades of engagement with China, ELI cultivated relationships with entities that State Armor's report characterizes as affiliated with the Chinese government, linked to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), or connected to China’s military research apparatus.
“Across three decades of engagement, ELI’s work has uniformly advanced Chinese strategic and national security interests while undermining American national security by constraining domestic energy producers and industrial expansion and simultaneously pushing America toward dependence upon energy sources dominated by the PRC,” stated a letter to congressional leadership accompanying the report.
State Armor, which focuses on state-level policy responses to foreign threats, expresses apprehension that these alleged ties could have significant domestic ramifications. The organization is led by Michael Lucci, a lobbyist who maintains the privacy of his donors to shield them from potential targeting by the Chinese government. Lucci noted in an April 2025 profile that his group declines funding from corporate and foreign sources to avoid any perceived conflicts of interest.
Concerns Over Foreign Influence in Judicial Training
The core concern raised by the congressional letter revolves around the integrity of the judicial system. It questions not merely the necessity of continuing education for judges, but whether any educational initiative that is funded, organized, or influenced by organizations with ties to foreign entities—especially a foreign adversary—could compromise the appearance or reality of judicial impartiality.
Founded in 1969 in Washington, D.C., ELI describes its mission as developing “innovative, just, and practical” environmental law and policy solutions across various borders and sectors. Its Climate Judiciary Project, established in 2018, is a judicial education program that concentrates on climate science, climate change, and how these scientific principles intersect with legal frameworks.
Recent activities by the nonprofit have also drawn attention. As recently as May, ELI’s journal published an English-language paper authored by two Chinese academics from state-run universities, which discussed China's advancements in environmental protection. In June, ELI hosted a Chinese legal scholar for a panel discussion on global career pathways in environmental law, featuring speakers from multiple countries. According to her biography on ELI’s website, the scholar, who completed an ELI fellowship in 2021, “participated in ministry-level projects on environmental legislation and policy of China” and “managed internationally funded programs” to train Chinese “judges” and “environmental law enforcement officers.”
Decades of Engagement with Chinese Entities
ELI’s website acknowledges its work “to improve environmental rule of law, enforcement, and compliance in China” since the “mid-1990s,” emphasizing “the critical role that China, and its 1.4 billion people, has in global environmental protection.” The organization states it has partnered with Chinese NGOs, universities, law firms, businesses, judges, and environmental regulators. Its activities have included capacity-building workshops, high-level roundtables, seminars, and panel discussions on Chinese policy issues, as well as training lawyers on environmental justice and publishing articles and books on sustainability, environmental management, and constitutional environmental law in China.
State Armor contends that this knowledge exchange ultimately benefits the Chinese government at the expense of U.S. interests. The group has urged lawmakers to examine the full scope of ELI’s collaboration with Chinese entities, including a review of the funding, curriculum development, expert selection, and governance structure of its judicial education programs.
“Under the banner of ‘improv[ing] environmental rule of law,’ ELI’s China Program provides technical assistance, capacity building, and legal training to Chinese NGOs, judges, and environmental regulators,” the State Armor report asserts.
To substantiate its claims, State Armor referenced public records indicating that some organizations ELI collaborated with are linked to the Chinese Communist Party or the People’s Liberation Army (PLA).
Specific Partnerships Under Scrutiny
State Armor specifically highlighted ELI’s stated collaboration with the Policy Research Center for Environment and Economy (PRCEE), a think tank associated with China’s Ministry of Ecology and Environment, to enhance China’s environmental regulatory system. State Armor argues that PRCEE’s affiliation with the Ministry and its policy-support role firmly place it within China’s governmental environmental-policy framework. In 2013, PRCEE contributed to a report titled “China’s Green Long March,” jointly published by the Chinese government and the United Nations Environment Programme, a title that notably echoes the CCP’s famous 1934
