About Time: New York Finally Passes Anti-SLAPP Bill
from the crazy-that-it-took-this-long dept
It's been truly amazing that, for years, despite being the heart of the media business in the US, New York state had a pathetically weak anti-SLAPP bill. It only applied to issues related to petitioning the government. So you were protected from lawsuit if you were complaining about a law or zoning issues, but these days most SLAPP suits are unrelated to such things. So it's exciting to find out that the New York legislature has finally passed a real anti-SLAPP law. The actual bill expands the coverage of NY's anti-SLAPP law to include:
Any communication in a place open to the public or a public forum in connection with an issue of public interest; or ii. Any other lawful conduct in furtherance of the exercise of the constitutional right of free speech in connection with an issue of public interest, or in furth- erance of the exercise of the constitutional right of petition. The bill also specifies that "public interest" should be broadly construed.
That's... great. Like many other anti-SLAPP laws, this one seeks to stop expensive discovery early on until the plaintiff can prove their case has a chance, and expands the situations in which attorneys' fees will be awarded to the defendant who was victimized by a SLAPP suit. The new law says that such costs and fees:
"shall be recovered upon a demonstration that a SLAPP suit was commenced or continued without a substantial basis in fact or law and could not be supported by a substantial argument for the extension, modification, or reversal of existing law."
NY Senator Brad Hoylman took a well deserved victory lap for getting this bill through (it still needs to be signed by Governor Cuomo):
#BREAKING: For decades, powerful men like Donald Trump & Harvey Weinstein have abused our justice system to silence, intimidate, and impoverish their critics with frivolous lawsuits known as SLAPPs.
Today New York slaps back. pic.twitter.com/X8nvOu8w8o
— Senator Brad Hoylman (@bradhoylman) July 22, 2020
Of course, given that we were just talking about how the 2nd Circuit (which covers NY), has decided that state anti-SLAPP laws don't apply in federal court, that still means that those wishing to bring SLAPP suits there can get around the law by coming up with some federal cause of action. This is yet another reminder of why we need a federal anti-SLAPP law already and it's a travesty we don't have one yet.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: anti-slapp, chilling effects, defamation, free speech, new york, slapp
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Horray!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
There's literally no argument against these laws, other than corruption, as 99.9% of legitimate lawsuits would be able to survive a motion to dismiss.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
So proud of my state today
I'm so proud of what my state has accomplished today. Amazing what can be done when a legislature works in the public's (rather than the donors') best interest!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Suck it, Charles!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
and Shiva
and Peter
and Devin
and…
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
And Hamilton. Don't forget Hamilton, Shiva Ayyadurai's prime fluffer operative.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
What does Lin-Manuel Miranda have to do with this?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
BTW, I was kidding. Don't accuse me of violating Poe's Law, please.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]