What's the motive behind Governor Murphy's "Free Speech" Legislation?
This announcement is throwing me for a loop.
“For far too long, the powerful have abused the justice system to suppress free speech through illegitimate lawsuits,” said Governor Murphy. “By pursuing meritless court cases, these powerful parties aim to silence their critics by making it impossible for those with fewer resources to spend the time and money necessary to legally defend themselves.”
From the press release:
Governor Phil Murphy today signed the ‘Uniform Public Expression Protection Act’ to protect people from meritless lawsuits intended to intimidate them for exercising their free speech rights. Powerful entities and individuals often use lawsuits and litigation threats to punish and silence those who might speak unfavorably about them. The bipartisan legislation will enable defendants to seek the expedited dismissal of such lawsuits, commonly referred to as ‘Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation’ (SLAPP), which have historically been used against journalists, academics, advocates, and whistleblowers – among others.
A SLAPP is generally used to silence individuals or organizations from publicly criticizing or bringing legitimate issues to light about an individual or entity with greater power and resources.
The New Jersey governor has been pretty selective about his support of free speech, so I’m wondering what is driving this.
According to the statement:
“This law will expedite the process to get these cases dismissed on behalf of the journalists, small businesses, activists, and countless others who have been unfairly targeted by these lawsuits over the years.”
And here are some of the voices for free speech…
“People should be able to speak their mind on the issues that matter most to them without the fear of becoming ensnared in an expensive, time-consuming lawsuit,” said First Assistant Attorney General Lyndsay V. Ruotolo. “The law signed by Governor Murphy today makes it much more difficult to use the legal system as a weapon, with the intent to bully individuals into silence. New Jersey is proud to become the latest state to enact a law that discourages, and creates a streamlined process to dismiss, baseless lawsuits that improperly target the lawful exercise of free speech.”
“Too often SLAPP suits have been used to silence criticism through costly and time-consuming legal proceedings. It’s a shame that bad actors have exploited our legal system to effectively strip outspoken New Jersey residents of their First Amendment rights,” said Assemblywoman Murphy. “Today, we are taking a stand by expediting the dismissal of these lawsuits, doing away with this intimidation tactic, and protecting freedom of speech in our state.”
“I am thrilled that New Jersey has enacted the Uniform Public Expression Protection Act (UPEPA), a strong anti-SLAPP bill that protects filmmakers, journalists, and everyday citizens from attacks on their First Amendment rights,” said Charles Rivkin, Chairman and CEO of the Motion Picture Association. “Under the leadership of Governor Murphy and the state legislature, New Jersey has become a major hub of film and television production, making it ever more urgent and important that the state protect the principles of free speech and artistic freedom on which a thriving creative ecosystem depends.”
The Motion Picture Association? Weird.
“The right to free speech is a cornerstone of our democracy, and we commend Governor Murphy and the bill sponsors for protecting this foundational right by making this bill law,” said ACLU of New Jersey Executive Director Amol Sinha. “This bill will help protect the public against serious and continuing threats to free speech in New Jersey by limiting the harms that people can face for speaking out on important public issues. The ACLU-NJ fights for New Jerseyans’ rights every day and we are proud to say that our rights have stronger protections today.”
The New Jersey Press Association, Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, New Jersey League of Municipalities and New Jersey League of Conservative Voters also had quotes praising the legislation…
I mean it sounds good - politicians are pretty good at making all their laws sound good - but who will this ultimately protect?
Something feels amiss. If you have any insights here, I’d love to hear them.
This is a terrible decision. Anti-Slapp’s are used against people with lesser means all the time. For example in California now if somebody sues their landlord for making them pay more than two months rent, the landlord will do an anti-slap if there’s an eviction associated with that even though it is the tenants right. They might win attorneys fees and tie up the tenants money and tie up the case for years.
An anti-Slapp has a place when somebody is suing strictly for enforcing their constitutional rights, but it is typically the deep pocketed companies who benefit from this type of a law. Even then it doesn’t always work, for example Trump and E. Jean Carroll.
Apparently, this is one example of a how the Uniform Public Expression Protection Act can be helpful: https://www.yudinssuesparents.com/