DC Court affirms Michael Mann’s right to proceed in defamation lawsuit against National Review and CEI

From Climate Science Watch:

Two decisions handed down July 19 in DC Superior Court affirmed climate scientist Michael Mann’s right to proceed in his defamation lawsuit against the Competitive Enterprise Institute and the National Review Online for their statements accusing him of data manipulation and fraud. The Court is not buying the Defendants arguments in their Motion to Dismiss that their statements are protected speech under the First Amendment, mere “opinion,” “rhetorical hyperbole,” or “fair comment.”

For more background see here.

Comments:

  1. Pingback: Another Week of Climate Disruption News, July 21, 2013 – A Few Things Ill Considered

  2. If anyone is feeling flush, they can donate to the Climate Science Legal Defense Fund to support these stalwart and stellar efforts (please forgive the repetition, shilling for science today):

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2013/jul/15/global-warming-games-legal-defense-fund
    http://climatesciencedefensefund.org/2013/07/

  3. Lots more detail here:

    http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/07/23/1225791/-Climate-Scientist-Michael-Mann-Takes-the-Bad-Guys-to-Court

    In case you're tempted to ignore this, a teaser and just to mention that instructions for the mildly tedious and very slightly obscure process of accessing the court documents are provided. The article states that Dr. Mann's lawyer is good at the job.

    So, imagine one of Dr. Mann's attorney's asking archly, why exactly, is it, National Review, that you don't believe the conclusions Dr. Mann draws from his science, hmmm? Who exactly is whispering in your ear about this? Is his name David, or Charles? How about Exxon? How about Clean Coal, whatever the hell that is? Whose science do you like better. Why? Who, exactly is advising NR about this issue?

    I'm guessing here that NR will mount an all out discovery assault on every footnote of every paper Dr. Mann ever put his name on, while exploring every conversation and communication he has ever had, while simultaneously and obstreperously obstructing any inquiries into its own editorial process, all in the name of protecting sources and the 1st Amendment. I'm predicting, with considerably greater confidence, that an honest trial judge (the one in this case might just be one of those) will slap NR down in their shoes for the kind of discovery crap I expect them to pull in a case like this.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.