SLAPPs (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation) are often brought by corporations, real estate developers, or other entities who oppose individuals on public interest issues including the environment.  They are usually civil complaints or counterclaims against an individual or organization who exercised free speech activities protected by the First Amendment.

Washington
The first modern anti-SLAPP bill was passed in Washington State in 1989. Legislative reaction was prompted by a high profile SLAPP case involving a woman who discovered that her housing developer was withholding taxes from the state amounting to more than $350,000.  She was subsequently SLAPPed by the housing company. The “Brenda Hill Bill,” as it was coined, passed unanimously. The bill is not as comprehensive as it should be - it neglects the need for an expedited dismissal, if warranted, but the courts have countered this with judicial action that corrects some of the flaws. The language of the statute can be found by clicking here. 

California
California’s anti-SLAPP law arose due to intense opposition from the California Building Industry Association.  Legislation overwhelmingly passed both houses twice and was subsequently vetoed by different governors. The third attempt, in 1992, was signed into law by Governor Pete Wilson after passing in the legislature. Governor Wilson, as quoted in SLAPPs: Getting Sued For Speaking Out, stated “It is our right as Americans to hold and express differing opinions about key public issues. This legislation will give courts new powers to throw out frivolous lawsuits whose only intent is to cut off public debate and stifle free speech.” Two states, Rhode Island (1993) and Massachusetts (1994), followed California’s lead and enacted parallel legislation. 

New York
Similarly, the New York Legislature took on the anti-SLAPP cause with a reactionary motive - legislators thought that the courts were not doing enough to discourage SLAPP litigation. In 1991, the first bills were introduced and had widespread support from the executive branch and from various public interest groups. Unfortunately, the bill, after having passed the state assembly 134-1, died in the senate. In 1992, another attempt was made and was met with success: the bill passed unanimously in the assembly and 53-5 in the house. New York’s Citizen Participation Act, according to George W. Pring and Penelope Canan, authors of SLAPPs: Getting Sued For Speaking Out, “is a commendable step forward in procedures but is not without its compromises and limitations.”

Minnesota
Minnesota’s law easily passed in 1994 (House: 102-23; Senate 51-0) with the support of a large number of environmental and social justice groups, most closely reflects the provisions in the sample bill highlighted by SERC and authored by George W. Pring and Penelope Canan. 

New Mexico
Most recently, New Mexico and Utah enacted anti-SLAPP laws. New Mexico’s law is intended to deter the filing of SLAPP suits, and says that individuals or organizations are immune from liability for participating in the processes of government unless there is no reasonable basis for the conduct and the conduct is undertaken in bad faith. A successful dismissal allows for recovery of attorney’s fees, and possibly other sanctions if the court finds that a motion to dismiss or for summary judgment is frivolous or solely intended to cause unnecessary delay.  This bill passed the House 44-22 and the Senate 30-12, and was signed into law on April 3, 2001. 

Utah
Utah’s Citizen Participation in Government Act was enacted in 2001 also and came into effect April 30, 2001. 

For information on the other states that have adopted anti-SLAPP legislation or are trying to do so, please see the California Anti-SLAPP Project’s website at http://www.casp.net/menstate.html. 

The following states have anti-SLAPP legislation: