Alito Dissent by Law&Crime on Scribd
Justice Alito wrote a dissent on the denial of certiorari (which means the Supreme Court declined to hear the case). It takes four justices to vote yes to take a case up to the Supreme Court. We don't know what happened behind the scenes (there are a lot of reasons why the Supreme Court declines to take a case) but as Justice Alito noted in page 6 of his dissent:
But as I noted in Brunetti, 588 U. S., at ___ (slip op., at 1) (concurring opinion), the pro-tection of even speech as trivial as a naughty trademark for jeans can serve an important purpose: It can demonstratethat this Court is deadly serious about protecting freedomof speech. Our decisions protecting the speech at issue in that case and the others just noted can serve as a promise that we will be vigilant when the freedom of speech and the press are most seriously implicated, that is, in cases involving disfavored speech on important political or social issues.
This is just such a case...Sad the rest of the Court did not see it that way. Ok--if there is going to be a trial--have a trial. Just what Mark Steyn recommended from the start.
Law & Crime: Prof Who Was Called the ‘Jerry Sandusky of Climate Science’ Can Sue National Review
EBL: No Mann Is An Island and What's happening in the world of climate change?
Mark Steyn: Michael E Mann, Loser, Liar, and Scoff Law
Steyn on Line: The War on Free Speech
AoSHQ: Morning Report 11.26.19
Michael Mann's cases always end the same way: The defendants always ask for his data to defend themselves, he refuses to show his (false, faked, made up data), the case gets thrown out. He knows he won't win because he cannot show the data, he simply wants to punish anyone who calls him out.
ReplyDeleteI hope it goes the same way on this one--and that Mark Steyn prevails and gets Michael Mann to pay his attorney fees and costs.
Delete