��֭����

Last week, New Jersey took an important step in protecting free expression on public issues when Gov. Phil Murphy signed Senate Bill , the Uniform Public Expression Protection Act. The bill, which protects against frivolous litigation, passed unanimously in both houses of the New Jersey Legislature. 

Plaintiffs typically file strategic lawsuits against public participation, or “SLAPPs,” against critics with the intent to burden or intimidate them into silence. Deep-pocketed parties will simply haul their outspoken opponents into court with claims that are costly and/or time-consuming to fight, hoping to intimidate the defendant(s) into self-censorship. Individuals or are frequent targets of SLAPPs.

Robust anti-SLAPP protections ensure that citizens can freely criticize the powerful and voice their concerns on public matters.

Citizens exercising their free speech rights should not have to endure the toll of litigation and risk their life savings defending themselves against meritless claims. With that in mind, FIREhas about the importance of legislation aimed at combating SLAPPs, and we even intervened last month after a Maine hospital threatened a SLAPP suit in retaliation against a 15-year-old teenager who criticized the hospital system’s safety standards. 

New Jersey joins more than 30 other states that have anti-SLAPP statutes. The New Jersey bill applies to lawsuits where the cause of action against a person is based on:

(1) communication in a legislative, executive, judicial, administrative, or other governmental proceeding;

(2) communication on an issue under consideration or review in a legislative, executive, judicial, administrative, or other governmental proceeding; or

(3) exercise of the right of freedom of speech or of the press, the right to assembly or petition, or the right of association, guaranteed by the United State Constitution or the New Jersey Constitution, on a matter of public concern.

The legislation allows New Jersey courts to pause and then dismiss frivolous lawsuits early in the litigation process and to award the victims of these frivolous lawsuits attorney’s fees and court costs related to defending their free expression.

Maine hospital threatens defamation lawsuit over 15-year-old’s Change.org petition

Press Release

When Northern Light Health threatened a lawsuit over 15-year-old Samson Cournane's activism, FIREsent a letter demanding the conglomerate back down.

Read More

Anti-SLAPP laws balance First Amendment rights that protect public participation against the legitimate need for civil remedies for speech that can constitutionally be a source of liability or for unrelated conduct. While you should not be able to unfairly silence critics through meritless litigation, in some instances, such as with provably defamatory speech, seeking relief through the court system may be appropriate. Well-crafted anti-SLAPP laws ensure that courts can quickly dismiss illegitimate claims that aim to silence speech while allowing cases with merit to proceed.

New Jersey’s Uniform Public Expression Protection Act is similar to drafted by the Uniform Law Commission, which promotes the enactment of state laws where uniformity is desirable and practical. Five other states have anti-SLAPP legislation substantially similar to ULC’s model Public Expression Protection Act.

Robust anti-SLAPP protections ensure that citizens can freely criticize the powerful and voice their concerns on public matters. That’s why FIREencourages other states that have not yet done so, or states whose anti-SLAPP laws provide weaker protections, to join New Jersey by enacting the robust protections in the Public Expression Act. 

FIRE applauds the New Jersey Legislature and Gov. Murphy for standing up for the First Amendment and the right to participate in public debates.