Please support us in our legal fight against Michael Mann.

Dear Friends,

We end the year, a long and struggling year for us on the business side, with this final appeal to NRO denizens. To help.

Specifically: To help National Review boot our litigious adversaries right in the briefs.

Which is the not-potty-mouthed way of us saying, we’re being sued, and we need your help so we can kick some legal a**.


I refer, of course, to the Nobel Prize non-winner Michael Mann, he the Penn State professor and climatologist, the hockey-stick-temperature-chart-maker, who is suing National Review, Mark Steyn, and the Competitive Enterprise Institute.


The background is here.

Formally sued and served, we’ve been to court, had our say, and paid a lot to say so, and now we stand on the cusp of a trial and discovery and depositions, which will cost a lot more.

Out of pocket.


Sure, we have insurance, and the insurer is paying the bills. But the insurer doesn’t pay the full fare, and I have to tell you, it is quite a fare. Quite. And now as we enter an intense phase of this case, where the legal hours will rise like the sea levels in Professor Mann’s dreams, that fare will become . . . stratospheric.

I’m expecting this will cost a couple hundred grand. And maybe more. Again, this is out of pocket.


Justice can be expensive.

We could settle or reach some deal where this annoying and costly case goes away. But: We are in this fight to win it. We find ourselves (as do a number of media acquaintances — check out these amicus briefs) at the forefront of defending not only NR but also the First Amendment and freedom of the press.

It is a good position to be in, for a website that is based on principle. But not a good position to be in if you already happen to be an entity that loses money every year, and survives thanks to the generosity of its readers, subscribers, and friends.

On top of the expected and all-too-necessary requests that I would usually make at this time of year to help us pay the bills, I now have the added burden of seeking even greater help to offset the legal costs we are incurring.

We find the suit against us to be a preposterous undertaking in a free society, and that just frosts our glaciers. So we are fighting. And we are determined to fight harder.


And: We are determined, as I said, to kick legal heinie. We can and will — with your help.

Would you help? Your financial support of National Review’s defense against the Mann suit is truly needed.

I ask for one reason: Our cause is truly righteous.

If you come to NRO again and again, as so many of you do, but have refused or failed to be moved by our past appeals, for whatever reason, even should it be a principled stand against paying for content, well, I am hoping you will find this time to be that one time when you respond to our plea. Not only with sentiments (“Win one for the Gipper, NR!”), but with real cash. Take this as your motivation: Our foes are intolerant, well-heeled, and determined to use the courts to gag NR, Mark Steyn, and any institution or writer (in their jargon, “deniers”) who questions any aspect of Global Warming science.

For 58 years NR has been in the business of sacred cow–tipping. Not genuflecting to the liberal establishment and its dogmas.


Please be generous to NRO. You can give here.

On behalf of Rich Lowry and all of our colleagues, I deeply appreciate your assisting our ongoing efforts to defend NRO, Mark Steyn, and free speech. And also on behalf of Rich and the NR Gang, I wish all of you — as you celebrate Hanukkah and Christmas, and as you look ahead to the new year — God’s blessings, His graces, His peace, and the happiness and goodwill that comes with this special season.

Best,

Jack Fowler

Publisher

P.S.: In a previous NRO appeal, I asked you to “please help National Review in its fight to kick Professor Michael Mann’s legal heinie.” At our D.C. court hearing earlier this year, Mann’s counsel, in his remarks (and in court motions), took umbrage at our use of “legal heinie”–kicking to raise support. It was a comical moment in the history of jurisprudence, and we are hoping, via this appeal, to see history repeat itself. Be part of that.