Bill Overview
Title: SLAPP Protection Act of 2022
Description: This bill establishes a motion in federal courts to allow for the dismissal of a claim with prejudice if (1) that claim is shown to be based on the moving party's exercise of free speech, (2) the responding party cannot establish essential elements of the claim or that there is a genuine issue of material fact, and (3) no exception under this bill applies.
Sponsors: Rep. Raskin, Jamie [D-MD-8]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals and entities potentially subject to SLAPP suits
Estimated Size: 33000000
- The SLAPP Protection Act is aimed at protecting individuals and entities from frivolous lawsuits that suppress free speech, often used to intimidate and silence critics.
- The legislation will primarily impact individuals and organizations that are engaged in activities that could be subject to lawsuits aimed at stifling their free speech rights.
- This includes journalists, activists, small independent publications, and individuals or groups speaking out on public interest issues.
- Given the potential broad application across sectors and the increasing use of SLAPP suits, a large and diverse segment of the population could benefit from these protections.
Reasoning
- This policy is designed to benefit individuals and organizations who are vulnerable to SLAPP suits aimed at suppressing free speech. Thus, journalists, activists, small media outlets, and community groups are primary beneficiaries.
- The policy won't affect everyone equally. Those not exposed to SLAPP suits, such as those not engaged in public interest activities or controversial discourse, will see negligible impact.
- We assume financial limitations will primarily cover legal aid, outreach, and education about SLAPP protections. This will reduce costs for those frequently at risk.
- Wellbeing will likely increase for those under the threat of SLAPP suits as legal costs and stress decrease.
- Given the budget constraints, the immediate implementation will prioritize high-risk states or high-incidence sectors, with expansion based on initial outcomes.
Simulated Interviews
Journalist (New York, NY)
Age: 35 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This new policy could immensely benefit our work; we often feel threatened by potential lawsuits from powerful figures trying to muzzle our reporting.
- Knowing there is legislative backing makes us more confident to pursue stories that matter without fear.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 4 |
Activist (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 29 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This is a big win for activists. Being sued can drain resources and demoralize us. This protection is essential for our democracy.
- I'm hopeful this will deter frivolous lawsuits and allow more voices to be heard.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 3 |
Community Organizer (Charleston, WV)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Having legislation that actively protects us from SLAPP suits means we can focus on community rather than courtrooms.
- It's reassuring and might encourage more engagement from community members.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Local Business Owner (Austin, TX)
Age: 52 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- While it's good to hear about protections, I've never been concerned about SLAPP suits personally.
- I might participate more in community dialogues knowing there's less risk, but this policy doesn't directly influence my day-to-day.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Blogger (Seattle, WA)
Age: 41 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's a game changer! Fear of being dragged into lawsuits points us to self-censorship; this is a good counter.
- I can now write more freely about things that matter without as much worry about potential legal battles.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 3 |
Retired Lawyer (Chicago, IL)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This act will reduce essential burdens on the legal system and empower people to speak without undue fear.
- I'm glad to see the law catching up with these intimidation tactics.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
YouTuber (Miami, FL)
Age: 27 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This makes it easier for content creators like me to produce honest content without as much fear.
- We need these protections to ensure diversity of thought and critique remains possible.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 4 |
Public School Teacher (Detroit, MI)
Age: 54 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm not directly involved with lawsuits, but knowing protections exist makes me feel more comfortable expressing my opinions publically.
- Policies like this empower educators to freely participate in shaping educational policies.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Tech Entrepreneur (Portland, OR)
Age: 38 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This aligns with our values about community empowerment and open discourse; it gives us confidence in our mission.
- Legal shields are generous, as there is a constant threat from entities that don't like competition.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
College Student (Salt Lake City, UT)
Age: 25 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- For students and younger activists, this is an empowering law safeguarding our right to speak up.
- Although I'm yet to face a major lawsuit, knowing protections exist is reassuring.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $15000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $20000000)
Year 2: $14500000 (Low: $9000000, High: $19000000)
Year 3: $14000000 (Low: $8500000, High: $18500000)
Year 5: $13000000 (Low: $8000000, High: $17500000)
Year 10: $12000000 (Low: $7000000, High: $16000000)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- Potentially high administrative adjustments in early years as courts integrate these protective measures.
- Difficulty in accurately predicting reductions in SLAPP suits due to diverse nature of claims.
- Extended societal benefits from enhanced free speech protections may not reflect immediately in fiscal terms but are valuable.