The Free Press Act: A Proposal to Reinvigorate Our Freedom of Speech

August 24, 2012 | Filed under Congress,Constitutional Issues,corruption,Culture Of Corruption,Democrats | Posted by

In this day of mounting threats to our freedoms it is time to reinvigorate our Bill of Rights and so Senator John Kyl (R, AZ) has introduced S. 3493, The Free Press Act. This bill aims to prevent nuisance lawsuits meant only to quash freedom of speech, to stop the intimidation of journalists, bloggers, and those testifying before government.

One would have hoped that such a bill would be unnecessary, but in our day of increasing attacks on freedom of speech perhaps the time has come to reaffirm and remind us all of the legacy our founders left to us.

The biggest development overseas in the campaign to eliminate free speech and freedom of the press has been the constant use of defamation lawsuits to silence the sort of speech certain parties are not fond of. These barrage attacks are often called “lawfare” and, sadly, they have come to our shores, as well.

In our system these attacks on free speech are called “SLAPP lawsuits.” These lawsuits come in two varieties, one against people who testify before government committees or in hearings and, two, increasingly against people who write opinion editorials or news reports. This could also apply easily to bloggers.

The method is to sue someone for defamation for giving his opinion “on a matter of public concern or that relates to a public official or figure.” In essence, someone that doesn’t like what was said about him on a public matter can launch a nuisance lawsuit in the hopes of cowing someone else and dampening their free speech. Plain and simple, these nuisance lawsuits are meant for the single purpose of getting someone to shut up.

Sadly, these frivolous suits are not at all uncommon. A recent search found many thousands of them going back decades. These lawsuits have simply gotten out of hand and Kyl’s bill attempts to provide a more instantaneous remedy to put an end to the mess such lawsuits create.

The short summary of the bill states that the bill is meant, “to protect first amendment rights of journalists and internet service providers by preventing States and the United States from allowing meritless lawsuits arising from acts in furtherance of those rights, commonly called ‘Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation’ or ‘SLAPPs’, and for other purposes.”

As Kyl said in a statement about his bill, the Free Press Act, “would create a Federal anti-SLAPP statute for journalists, bloggers, and other news media, authorizing them to bring a special motion to dismiss lawsuits brought against them that arise out of their speech on public issues. Once the special motion to dismiss is brought, the nonmoving party must present a prima facie case supporting the lawsuit; if the nonmovant fails to do so, the lawsuit is dismissed and fees and costs are awarded to the movant.”

In other words, the FPA would force those initiating frivolous SLAPP lawsuits to justify their case before moving forward. If they can’t convince a judge that their case is solid, it is immediately thrown out. This bill also would force the plaintiff to pay the defendant’s costs if his SLAPP suit is dismissed.

Senator Kyl is finding support for this bill across the spectrum from journalist groups, to free speech advocates, to conservatives and even some liberals, this bill is getting vocal support. It is currently in the Committee on the Judiciary in the Senate. More Americans need to know of the existence of this bill so they can urge their representatives and senators to get behind it.

« « Anderson Cooper Does His Job
Move Over Floyd Corkins » »

Shortlink:

Posted by on August 24, 2012.
Filed under Congress, Constitutional Issues, corruption, Culture Of Corruption, Democrats.
Warner Todd Huston is a Chicago-based freelance writer, has been writing opinion editorials and social criticism since early 2001 and is featured on many websites such as Andrew Breitbart's BigGovernment.com and BigJournalism.com, RightWingNews.com, CanadaFreePress.com, RightPundits.com, StoptheACLU.com, Human Events Magazine, among many, many others. Additionally, he has been a frequent guest on talk-radio programs to discuss his opinion editorials and current events.He has also written for several history magazines and appears in the new book "Americans on Politics, Policy and Pop Culture" which can be purchased on amazon.com. He is also the owner and operator of PubliusForum.com. Feel free to contact him with any comments or questions, EMAIL Warner Todd Huston: igcolonel .at. hotmail.com"The only end of writing is to enable the reader better to enjoy life, or better to endure it." --Samuel Johnson

You can leave a response or trackback to this entry
  • jim_m

    obama would never sign such a bill. Why on earth would he want to put dem operatives like Bret Kimberlin out of business?

    • GarandFan

      Nailed it. And it wouldn’t be long before another law was proposed aimed at folks like the Sierra Club – who manage to come up with unsupported “theories”. Nail them with court costs a couple of times and they’ll go under.

  • JWH

    I would support a federal law applying this to federal courts, but not a federal law applying it to state courts.

    • jim_m

      Virtually all these suits are brought in state court, so you are advocating for a meaningless law.

      • JWH

        Maybe from that perspective. But I prefer that laws on state courts originate from state legislatures, with a federal mandate on states as the last resort. A number of states have SLAPP statutes as it is. Is there some insurmountable barrier to lobbying the remaining state legislatures to pass anti-SLAPP legislation?

        • retired.military

          Yeah Democratic governors

    • Commander_Chico_Cognoscente

      It’s limited to federal courts. I don’t think the Constitution would allow federal imposition of court procedural rules on the states.

      But in a lot of cases, the defendant could remove the case to federal court for various reasons and use the rule.

  • http://www.facebook.com/Stan25 Stan Brewer

    I doubt that Dingy Harry would even bring the bill to the floor a vote. Anything that smacks of reducing the power of government is not to be considered. The last attempt to repeal ObamaCare that was passed by the House is a good example of this.

  • http://www.facebook.com/Stan25 Stan Brewer

    Why stop there? Reform the entire Tort industry.

  • Commander_Chico_Cognoscente

    Looks good, but seems to be limited to “representatives of the news media,” which is defined vaguely. My question: is Chico protected?

    • SteveCrickmore075

      Chico, speaking of free speech and the media, your Presidential candiate, Gary Johnson , despite the silence or gagging order of the mainstream media, still could be very critical in the election.

      • Commander_Chico_Cognoscente

        I dispute the imputation that birthers are potential Gary Johnson voters, but it would be great if he made an impact, maybe even won NM and AK.

  • Pingback: The Free Press Act: A Proposal to Reinvigorate Our Freedom of Speech – Wizbang (blog)