So you don't see any problem with Scot Pruitt requiring scientists to break the law in order to have the legitimate results of their research considered by the EPA? Does that sound reasonable to you?
Because that's what he's doing. Scientists do not own all the data they use for their studies. Oftentimes, they have to buy that information, just like you have to buy music. And they often come with limitations of who can see the data and who can use it. They don't have carte blanche to publish all the data. This runs the gamut from epidemiological studies to simple temperature measurements in foreign countries. Breaking those contracts would have financial and legal consequences, not to mention making negotiations for further data more difficult, if not impossible.
So Pruitt is basically hamstringing such studies with an unreasonable demand. Because that data is available, just like music. All you have to do is pay for it, promise to adhere to the required restrictions, and use it for legitimate purposes. But of course there are those who don't want to pay for it, don't want any restrictions on it, and only want it to dispute findings they don't like. And Pruitt appears to be supporting such people, not by providing them the data, but by ignoring the results of the data.