Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR) and Reps. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) and Kevin Kiley (R-CA) on Thursday officially introduced federal anti-SLAPP legislation, meant to protect journalists and other critics from frivolous lawsuits, particularly of the sort that are expected under the new Trump regime.
I broke the news of the existence of the legislation, and the plan to introduce it, last week. SLAPP stands for strategic lawsuit against public participation, and wealthy people often use them to chill criticism, bury their critics in legal fees and force them to divulge sensitive information during discovery. There is a patchwork of anti-SLAPP measures at the state level, but no federal law; some federal appellate courts don’t allow defendants to use state anti-SLAPP protections, incentivizing those who file these suits to forum shop.
“The rich and powerful are all too willing to use the legal system to bludgeon reporters, activists and whistleblowers with expensive lawsuits, even if the claims have no merit,” Wyden said in a statement.
“Goliath triumphs over David in our justice system when powerful special interests can silence their critics with frivolous strategic lawsuits against public participation, or ‘SLAPPs,’” Raskin added.
And check out the subtle conservative valence of Kiley’s contribution: “The Free Speech Protection Act will stop trial lawyers from abusing our justice system, clogging our courts, and silencing those they deem to have incorrect politics,” he said.
It was important to Raskin to recruit a Republican as part of the effort. Kiley, a swing-district Republican who’d taken Raskin’s seminar at Yale Law and collaborated with him on another journalist protection measure, fit the bill.
Wyden was less successful in courting bipartisan interest, ultimately heading up the Senate version alone.
Without robust Republican support — itself an indictment of both Trump’s anti-press crusade and his tendency to file these lawsuits himself — the legislation may well stall out (despite the fact that Trump has also used state-level anti-SLAPP protections successfully in his own legal defense). Advocates I spoke to chalked it up as a win that the legislation got this far.
The 11th-hour, longshot attempt to get it over the line, though, presages the dark days ahead under the Trump administration. Freedom of speech advocates fear that Donald Trump, or those in his orbit, will use these lawsuits and a weaponized federal law enforcement to intimidate critics and crack down on those who defy them. As always, those with the fewest resources are the most vulnerable.
“I am most worried about it when it comes to SLAPPs against the little guy,” Caitlin Vogus, senior adviser for Freedom of the Press Foundation, told me. “For freelance journalists out there on their own, if you have to defend yourself and spend your own money, you may think twice before you write something true and critical about someone powerful.”
The Best Of TPM Today
It’s Looking Like Even The Smallest Crack In The Ranks Could Paralyze The Incoming House GOP
Missouri Voters Enshrined Abortion Rights. GOP Lawmakers Are Already Working to Roll Them Back.
I Won’t Drink Anymore If That’s What It Takes To Be SecDef!
Yesterday’s Most Read Story
What We Are Reading
Argentina’s Milei hosts Trump allies, Bolsonaro clan at right-wing summit
LA Times to Publish ‘Bias Meter’ on News Stories, Owner Says
Tulsi Gabbard’s views on Russia shaped in part by Kremlin propaganda outlet, ex-aides say
I appreciate this bill, even if it doesn’t have much chance of passing before that man takes office.
Ron and Jamie never stop putting up the good fight. We are lucky to have them.
Why? We have plenty of these laws.
What a waste. Let journalist protect themselves, I mean are they some official constituency of the Democrat party? We already have a first amendment. Linking the Dem party with journalist and their health is not going to win elections. Dem’s should be in the business of winning elections. The only protections/opposition should be laser focused on the street. Or does RaskinWyden (who I love) own some media stock options. I’m sorry but this is ridiculous. It reeks of half-measures, insiderism and weakness.
“We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty. We must remember always that accusation is not proof and that conviction depends upon evidence and due process of law. We will not walk in fear, one of another. We will not be driven by fear into an age of unreason, if we dig deep in our history and our doctrine, and remember that we are not descended from fearful men – not from men who feared to write, to speak, to associate, and to defend causes that were, for the moment, unpopular.” ― Edward R. Murrow