An Associated Press article deleted a statement on Wednesday from climate scientist Michael Mann, famous for pursuing a libel suit against National Review and Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI).
Associated Press released an article Monday concerning the Trump administration Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) revoking a scientific finding that has been the backbone for US regulation on greenhouse gas emissions and quoted Mann saying the EPA would be cementing Republican climate denial with this measure. Associated Press later removed Mann’s statement from the article the same day it was published without stating why they did so. (RELATED: Trump Admin Withdrawing From ‘Anti-American’ Global Climate Change Regimes)
The Associated Press did not immediately respond to the Daily Caller News Foundation’s request for comment.
Mann famously created the “hockey stick” graph, which showed the Earth’s temperature spiking upward in the 20th century after being relatively stable for 500 years according to an article written by Mann for the Scientific American. The graph shot Mann into the national spotlight according to Mann’s article.
NEW YORK, NY – JUNE 21: Scientist Michael Mann attends the New York screening of the HBO Documentary “How To Let Go Of The World And All The Things Climate Can’t Change” on June 21, 2016 in New York City. (Photo by Slaven Vlasic/Getty Images)
Mann sued Rand Simberg of the CEI and Mark Steyn of National Review for a blog post that claimed Mann manipulated scientific data around his “hockey stick” graph showing an exponential rise in global temperature, according to the Scientific American. Simberg wrote in his blog that Mann could be compared to Jerry Sandusky, an infamous coach who molested children, “except that instead of molesting children, he has molested and tortured data in the service of politicized science that could have dire economic consequences for the nation and planet” according to a report by Ars Technica.
Steyn quoted Simberg’s blog in a National Review column leading to suing both men and publications in 2012, according to the Scientific American.
A jury ruled in favor of Mann in 2024, entitling him to a payout of $1 million according to the Scientific American. However, in 2025, the courts ordered Mann to pay legal fees of National Review which amounted to $530,000 under rules that would ensure critics from being burdened with legal fees according to a Washington Post report.
The initial payout was reduced to only $5000 because the presiding DC Judge Alfred Irving believed Mann did not prove he suffered injury to his business as a result of the article, according to Reason Magazine. Judge Irving also made Mann pay $1 million to cover his critic’s legal fees as the judge ruled Mann’s lawyers showed a misleading chart to the jury that suggested Mann lost $9.8 million in funding grants due to the critical article, even though he did not according to a Legal Newsline report.
All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact [email protected].