Mark Steyn writes on his webpage:
There was some modest activity yesterday in the Mann vs Steyn climate-change hockey-stick case, which will shortly be entering its eighth year. As that ludicrous fact testifies, it has been procedurally bollocksed by the District of Columbia courts, which is why it will almost certainly be headed to the Supreme Court. When it gets there, it will be the most consequential free-speech case since New York Times vs Sullivan fifty-five years ago.
Lest you doubt that, consider yesterday’s request by the Reporters Committee for the Freedom of the Press and various other parties to file an amicus brief on the merits of the case – that’s to say, on the danger Michael E Mann’s victory would pose for the “right to freedom of speech and of the press”. Those supporting our side in this battle include not only the chaps you might expect, such as Fox News, but an awful lot you might not – including NBC, The Washington Post and the ACLU. Because they all recognize the threat that Mann poses to a free society in demanding the courts adjudicate public-policy disputes.
Also, apparently, Mike Mann picked up a friend to help him in the Tort wars, a conservative no less.
Read all about it here
My Take - I've been following this for years and wondered what was happening with the Steyn SLAPP suit. Mann lost in Canada in his SLAPP suit against Dr. Tim Ball because he refused to turn over his data. I expect the same here. Steyn notes this is a huge issue regarding free speech, but this could also be one of the biggest game changers in the war for valid science and scientific transparency. However, we need to remember Steyn counter sued, so it will be interesting to see what Steyn does when Mann loses. Given Steyn's character, I suggest this might be enormously expensive for Mann and the David Suzuki Foundation that funded these SLAPP suits for Mann.
There was some modest activity yesterday in the Mann vs Steyn climate-change hockey-stick case, which will shortly be entering its eighth year. As that ludicrous fact testifies, it has been procedurally bollocksed by the District of Columbia courts, which is why it will almost certainly be headed to the Supreme Court. When it gets there, it will be the most consequential free-speech case since New York Times vs Sullivan fifty-five years ago.
Lest you doubt that, consider yesterday’s request by the Reporters Committee for the Freedom of the Press and various other parties to file an amicus brief on the merits of the case – that’s to say, on the danger Michael E Mann’s victory would pose for the “right to freedom of speech and of the press”. Those supporting our side in this battle include not only the chaps you might expect, such as Fox News, but an awful lot you might not – including NBC, The Washington Post and the ACLU. Because they all recognize the threat that Mann poses to a free society in demanding the courts adjudicate public-policy disputes.
Also, apparently, Mike Mann picked up a friend to help him in the Tort wars, a conservative no less.
Read all about it here
My Take - I've been following this for years and wondered what was happening with the Steyn SLAPP suit. Mann lost in Canada in his SLAPP suit against Dr. Tim Ball because he refused to turn over his data. I expect the same here. Steyn notes this is a huge issue regarding free speech, but this could also be one of the biggest game changers in the war for valid science and scientific transparency. However, we need to remember Steyn counter sued, so it will be interesting to see what Steyn does when Mann loses. Given Steyn's character, I suggest this might be enormously expensive for Mann and the David Suzuki Foundation that funded these SLAPP suits for Mann.
No comments:
Post a Comment