The University of Virginia has launched a legal effort to set aside the state attorney general’s demands for extensive records involving Penn State climatologist Michael Mann.

A number of scientific organizations have expressed concern over Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli’s “unprecedented” (the term used by the University of Virginia) investigation of Mann’s research activities while he was at U.Va. from 1999 to 2005. As a state entity generally represented by the state’s attorney general, the University had to retain outside counsel to defend against what it characterized as an unwarranted intrusion into the scientific process and academic freedom.

“The information requested goes to the core of academic research otherwise protected by law,” attorneys from the firm of Hogan Lovells said on behalf of U.Va. “Unfettered debate and the expression of conflicting ideas without fear of reprisal are cornerstones of academic freedom; they consequently are carefully guarded First Amendment concerns.”

The university’s lawyers say the A.G. exceeded his “limited statutory power” in issuing the “civil investigative demand,” requiring compilation of a large but unspecified amount of materials from Mann’s years at U.Va. They pointed out that several reviews of Mann’s research and related climate findings “have not found any fraudulent conduct.” And they pointed out that the A.G.’s requests, involving communications with 39 other scientists, “are extremely broad and do not appear to be tailored to any of the grants identified.”

The American Meteorological Society, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, and the University Corporation of Atmospheric Research are among a number of scientific societies and other organizations that have specifically expressed opposition to the Virginia A.G.’s legal action against U.Va. and Mann. The American Geophysical Union, AGU, has not yet publicly taken a position, but an AGU representative says the group has penned and submitted for broad publication an op-ed on the issue and that its silence to date should not be interpreted as its having no view on the legal challenge. She said the group hopes for early word on acceptance of the op-ed, in the absence of which she said it would find alternative ways to make its views known.