A science professor says he was fired from the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, New York, for refusing to ignore the human causes of climate change, and is now suing the institution in federal court.
Dr. Adam Kalkstein, a professor of geography, told The New York Times that the dean of West Point’s academic board, Brigadier General Shane Reeves, in a meeting last year ordered him to remove everything about human contributions to climate change, as President Trump sets the agenda as commander in chief. Kalkstein told Reeves that such a change would be immoral, and possibly illegal. When Reeves suggested Kalkstein resign, Kalkstein declined, after which the dean stormed out of the room.
“We’re only telling cadets part of the story. We’re lying to them, deceiving them. It would be like trying to teach the law without being able to even mention the Constitution,” Kalkstein reportedly said during the meeting, according to Stars and Stripes.
Six months later, Kalkstein, a tenured professor, was told his contract wouldn’t be renewed, and on Monday, he sued the institution in the Southern District of New York, alleging that his First Amendment rights were violated. The lawsuit states that the institution’s order would require Kalkstein “to omit a massive, fundamental, essential component of the court and to defy science.”
According to the Times, Kalkstein is a conservative Republican who believes military cadets need to know the truth about climate change for national security reasons rather than social justice. He wrote a letter to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth arguing that knowing the causes of climate change was important for competing over resources in the Arctic and understanding why sea ice was melting.
Hegseth, along with the rest of the Trump administration, is trying to purge “wokeness” from government and military institutions, including any acknowledgment of climate change. Early in his tenure last year, Hegseth boasted on X that “The @DeptofDefense does not do climate change crap. We do training and warfighting.”
That’s a major departure from previous administrations. In 2021, the Pentagon concluded in a report that “increasing temperatures; changing precipitation patterns; and more frequent, intense, and unpredictable extreme weather conditions caused by climate change are exacerbating existing risks.”
Those risks still exist, but the Trump administration is flat-out ignoring the science for financial and culture-war reasons. Professors like Kalkstein, and the knowledge of America’s future military officers, are among the casualties.
The Iran war has gravely exacerbated the U.S. military’s advanced missile interceptor shortage in Europe.
The shortage is “beyond critical,” as supplies have been quickly and unexpectedly drained by the Iran war, according to a Europe-based U.S. defense official, as well as a NATO official who spoke with the Associated Press Thursday.
The deficit is most serious for the country’s Patriot missile interceptors, which are capable of shooting down ballistic missiles and aircraft but have been heavily relied upon during the war to stave off Iran’s Shahed swarming attack drones.
The deficit boils down to a supply chain problem. Iran’s drones are small, simple to manufacture, and cost roughly $20,000 to produce. They can be launched from almost anywhere, and use GPS to find their target. They’re typically launched en masse to overwhelm opposing defense systems.
Patriot missiles, meanwhile, cost between $3 million and $4 million per unit. An entire Patriot battery system can cost as much as $1.1 billion, including the launcher, radar, and missiles. As a result of the missiles’ enormous price tag, production of America’s highly sought-after Patriot system is relatively slow compared to its demand. In 2025, Lockheed Martin created 620 units of the Patriot missile. Iran, in comparison, is capable of producing about 10,000 drones per month, reported Reuters.
U.S. missile stockpiles were transferred from Europe to the Middle East to aid the war effort, but that has left NATO and American forces based in Europe empty-handed in the face of a potential Russian attack on the continent. The U.S. defense official told the AP that the situation could force America or its European allies “to take punch after punch in the mouth” should the Kremlin decide to launch an assault on a regional military base or nuclear facility.
European and NATO officials have warned that Russia could be in a strategic position to attack the alliance by 2030—though defense contractors have projected that America’s Patriot missile stockpiles should rebound by that point.
