D.C. jury unjustly finds Mark Steyn liable for defamation of Michael Mann, awards $1 million in punitive damages.

American Thinker ^ | 9 Feb, 2024 | Thomas Lifson

[MtnClimber]

Global warming doomsayer Michael Mann of Penn State University has won his defamation lawsuit against critics Mark Steyn and Rand Simburg, proving that conservatives cannot get fair verdicts from District of Columbia juries. This is a huge, structural problem for the federal judiciary, because D.C. courts have jurisdiction over many actions regarding the federal government. Bias to the point of hatred of Republicans and conservatives by D.C. juries has made those courts a part of the Democrats’ armory.

If Republicans ever again get the Oval Office and majorities in both Houses of Congress, they must redefine the jurisdiction of lower courts so that actions involving the federal government rotate among all judicial districts. Democrats will fight this measure with a Senate filibuster, but Republicans can argue that the juries must “look like America.”

I am deeply worried for Mark’s health, as he has been very ill, and this massive setback might lead to worse health outcomes.

I rely on retired super-lawyer John Hinderaker, who attended some of the trial, on the question of the unjustness of the verdict:

The verdict was disappointing to those of us who followed the case and thought that Michael Mann presented a pathetically inadequate case. The jury actually agreed: it found that the defendants had defamed Mann, but awarded only a token $1 in damages, since Mann had failed to prove any. But it found that both Simberg and Steyn acted with actual malice–they didn’t actually believe what they said about Mann–and awarded punitive damages in the amount of $1,000 against Simberg, and $1 million against Steyn.

In a sane world, this case never would have gone to the jury. The legal standard is actual malice, which means the defendants must have thought, subjectively, that what they said wasn’t likely true.

[EnquiringMind]

This makes me want to scream and vomit at the same time.

[EnquiringMind]

I miss him too.

[BitWielder1]

This is eerily similar to the E. Jean Carroll case.

Plaintiff Lied.
Defendant called out the Lie.
Defendant is sued for defamation for calling out the Lie.
Jury awards the plaintiff a ridiculous amount of money for "defamation" even though the defendant did not commit any crime.

[MtnClimber]

It is eerily similar. Also left wing juries instinctively ruling against the conservative regardless of the facts.

[Pajamajan]

Unbelievable. Prayers for Mark Steyn.

[Pajamajan]

In John Williams’ closing argument on behalf of Mann, he said that the jury should award punitive damages so that in the future, no one will dare engage in “climate denialism”

The real reason for this. 👆👆👆👆👆👆👆👆