Measly Court Victory Upheld For Climate Scientist Who Hoped To ‘Ruin’ Conservative Paper

Climate scientist Michael Mann, who sued Canadian conservative author Mark Steyn for defamation, maintained a narrow victory in court on Tuesday after the seven-figure punitive damages initially ordered were reduced to just a few thousand dollars.

Steyn was originally ordered to pay Mann $1 million in punitive damage charges for an article he wrote for the National Review in 2012 criticizing Mann, though the District of Columbia Superior Court reduced the charges to just $5,000. In January, National Review editors announced that a Washington, D.C. judge also ordered the climate scientist to pay over $500,000 to cover some of the outlet’s legal fees.

The final judgement order on Tuesday granted Steyn’s 2024 request to drastically reduce the punitive damages, which he argued should be “$5,000 or less,” from $1 million to the requested amount of $5,000.

The 13-year legal battle began in 2012, after Steyn criticized Mann and his climate “hockey stick” graph, which showed a rapid increase in global warming, in an article published by the National Review, resulting in Mann suing for defamation. Editor Rich Lowry then wrote a follow-up post for the conservative outlet defending Steyn’s comments, and Mann then chose to also sue the outlet for defamation.