West Point fires lone climate scientist after dispute over teaching human causes of climate change

A court filing says Dr Adam Kalkstein, the only climate scientist teaching at the United States Military Academy, was dismissed after defying an order to stop teaching that human activity drives the climate emergency; he compared the directive to teaching law without mentioning the constitution.

Lawsuit says professor dismissed after resisting order

A lawsuit filed on behalf of Dr Adam Kalkstein alleges he was terminated from his civilian professorship at the United States Military Academy at West Point after refusing an order to cease teaching that human activity is a principal driver of the climate emergency. Kalkstein, described in the court filing as the academy's only climate scientist, was reportedly dismissed after the spring semester this year.

The complaint recounts a contentious meeting between Kalkstein and Brigadier General Shane Reeves, then dean of West Point's academic board, that took place about six months prior to his termination. According to the filing, Kalkstein resisted the instruction and likened it to trying to teach the law without mentioning the constitution — a comparison he used to underline his view that the human causes of climate change are central to the subject he teaches.

The filing frames the dismissal as a dispute over academic freedom and curriculum content. It asserts that Kalkstein continued to present the scientific consensus on anthropogenic climate change in his classes after being told to stop, and that his continued instruction led to his removal.

West Point is the United States Army's service academy in New York and trains future Army officers. The case raises questions about how scientific topics, including climate change, are addressed within military education and whether external or internal pressures influence classroom instruction.

The lawsuit will determine whether the academy's actions violated Kalkstein's rights or employment protections as a civilian faculty member. The court filing, as reported, provides the principal account of events; it does not contain responses from military officials or the academy itself within the text of the complaint.

Observers say the outcome could have implications for how academic staff at military institutions teach subjects that intersect with policy and national security. The proceedings will likely draw attention from academic freedom advocates and those concerned about the role of climate science in preparing military leaders.