In a long-running legal saga that’s finally come to an end, a court in Washington D.C. has ordered Michael Mann, a climate scientist at the University of Pennsylvania, to pay a hefty sum of over $530,000 in attorney fees and costs to National Review.
This decision marks a big win for National Review, which had been sued by Mann for defamation and emotional distress. The lawsuit stemmed from two 2012 blog posts that questioned Mann’s work and involvement in a political dispute. The court ultimately deemed Mann’s case baseless, but the battle dragged on for more than eight years, costing National Review a lot of time, money, and effort to defend themselves.
As the legal process unfolded, it was revealed that Mann’s true goal was to use the lawsuit to “ruin National Review.” Despite the lengthy fight, National Review stood its ground, and last week’s court order has Mann now on the hook for $530,820.21, payable within 30 days. While this amount falls short of the $1 million National Review had sought, it’s still a significant financial blow to Mann and a strong victory for free speech.
National Review shared its frustration, noting that it took far too long to get this case dismissed in the first place. However, they celebrated the win, calling Mann’s actions “appalling” and stating that now, “he must pay up.”
This case is a clear reminder of the importance of protecting free speech and the right to critique public figures, especially when legal threats are used to stifle debate. It also serves as a warning to those who might try to use the court system to silence opposing views.
For those who don’t know, Dr. Michael Mann is a prominent climate scientist at the University of Pennsylvania, where he focuses on climate science and change.
In a time when free speech is under constant scrutiny, this ruling serves as a reminder that, while disagreements may happen, silencing voices through litigation is never the answer.
