In this study, law students (n = 49) read multiple authentic documents presenting conflicting information on the topic of climate change and responded to verification tasks assessing their superficial as well as their deeper-level within- and across-documents comprehension. Hierarchical multiple regression analyses showed that even after variance associated with readers' prior knowledge about the topic was accounted for, their epistemic beliefs related to the simplicity of knowledge and the justification for knowing about climate change uniquely predicted their comprehension performance. The findings are interpreted with reference to the strong emphasis on multiple-documents literacy in the law degree program.