Biglaw's Climate Scorecard Is Out, And The AI Data Center Boom Just Made The Curve Worse - Above the Law

Law firms promote pro bono and mentoring efforts to attract students, but recruiting can mask less favorable work tied to corporate pollution and fossil fuel consumption. Law Students for Climate Accountability produces an annual report ranking Vault 100 firms based on fossil fuel work. The 2026 scorecard grades firms on litigation, transactions, and lobbying that either worsens or reduces climate change, then assigns each firm the worst of its three scores. The methodology avoids averaging and rejects “netting” greenhouse gas emissions, arguing that emissions are not removed from the atmosphere simply because renewable energy production increases. The report also notes that some firms still perform well, including Foley Hoag, which earned an A+ after prior A-tier performance.

"The Law Students for Climate Accountability puts together an annual report ranking the Vault 100 on how much fossil fuel work they do. In the era of on-campus interviewing, the Spring presented an excellent opportunity to do some research before selling your services to a law firm defending the rights of companies to burn chemicals next to schools. Maybe that's an added advantage to Biglaw blowing up that schedule - they can lock in students before they have time to figure out what their new job entails."

"The 2026 Scorecard grades the Vault 100 on litigation, transactions, and lobbying that either exacerbates or mitigates climate change, then assigns each firm the worst of its three scores. LSCA refuses to average, recognizing the concept of "net" damage as uniquely damaging in climate discourse. "The idea of netting is not tethered to reality," the report explains, "greenhouse gas emissions are not netted out of the atmosphere simply because more renewable energy is being produced.""

"Without further ado, here's this year's scorecard: The 2026 Scorecard grades the Vault 100 on litigation, transactions, and lobbying that either exacerbates or mitigates climate change, then assigns each firm the worst of its three scores. LSCA refuses to average, recognizing the concept of "net" damage as uniquely damaging in climate discourse. "The idea of netting is not tethered to reality," the report explains, "greenhouse gas emissions are not netted out of the atmosphere simply because more renewable energy is being produced.""

Read at Above the Law