In recent years, there has been an increase in the use of civil lawsuits by individuals and corporations with deep pockets, in order to silence critics and opponents. These Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation, known as SLAPPs, do not necessarily aim to win on legal merits, but rather to harass journalists, activists, and consumers into silence on protected speech. While 34 states in the United States have laws protecting against these abuses, there is still no effective federal protection in place.
Recently, representatives Jamie Raskin and Kevin Kiley introduced bipartisan legislation, the Free Speech Protection Act, which represents one of the best opportunities in years to secure strong federal protection for those facing harassing and baseless lawsuits. This law could be a crucial tool in preventing the use of SLAPPs as legal weapons that favor the powerful.
SLAPPs are often used by individuals or publicly criticized companies, who use these lawsuits as a form of intimidation. In many cases, the plaintiffs do not seek to win the case, but rather to pressure through the stress and high legal costs involved in defense, which can lead to the silencing or intimidation of the plaintiffs.
While state anti-SLAPP laws have proven effective, their application in federal courts is limited. This allows certain plaintiffs to manipulate the judicial system by filing lawsuits in jurisdictions with weak or non-existing SLAPP laws.
Over the years, there have been several examples of how SLAPPs have been used to attack activists and online critics. One notable case is that of activists in Uniontown, Alabama, who were sued by a company for depositing toxic ash in a local landfill, claiming $30 million for defamation. Another case involved Shiva Ayyadurai, who filed a $15 million lawsuit against a blog for questioning his claim of inventing email. Additionally, Congressman Devin Nunes has filed multiple lawsuits against critics on Twitter, taking advantage of weaknesses in anti-SLAPP laws in certain states.
The Free Speech Protection Act would allow defendants to file a special motion to dismiss the lawsuit, which the court must resolve within 90 days. If the motion is granted, the claims are dismissed, and in many cases, the defendant could recover legal costs.
The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) has been defending online expression rights for over 30 years and emphasizes that robust federal legislation against SLAPPs could significantly contribute to creating an online environment where anyone can freely express themselves and advocate for change, especially in the face of those with more power and resources. The EFF urges Congress to urgently pass the Free Speech Protection Act.
via: MiMub in Spanish
