|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) suits are initiated by public officials and large conglomerate corporations against private citizens with the intent of silencing criticism and stifling petitioning activity. However, new bills enacted by brave leaders such as Missouri Sen. John Loudon, R-West St. Louis County, have successfully passed legislation that will create protections against these so-called "SLAPP" suits. "This legislation will chill the chillers of free speech," said Loudon. "The government has a legitimate interest in preventing SLAPP lawsuits because government wants input from its citizens. If private citizens are afraid of being sued, their view will not be heard." |
Defending a SLAPP lawsuit, even when the legal defense is strong, requires a substantial investment of money, time and resources. The resulting effect is a "chill" on public participation in, and open debate on, important public issues. "This 'chilling' effect is not limited to the SLAPP target," said Loudon. "Fearful of being the target of future litigation, others refrain from speaking on, or participating in, issues of public concern." "We want to protect the right of citizens to petition the government," Loudon said. "This is the essence of what the First Amendment is supposed to protect." |
Every year, thousands of people are sued for participating in government or for speaking out on public issues. Don't let fear of SLAPPs keep you from taking a stand America! Your forefathers fought and died to bring you the right to practice freedom of expression, use it!
Practice Your First Amendment Rights! |
SLAPP targets have been sued for engaging in a wide variety of protected speech and protected expression activities, including:
|
circulating petitions calling a public official reporting police misconduct erecting a sign or displaying a banner on their property complaining to school officials about teacher misconduct or unsafe conditions in the school |
reporting unlawful activities testifying before Congress or state legislatures speaking as an officer of an active public interest group filing a public interest lawsuit |
|
SLAPPs are an attempt to privatize public debate. These lawsuits have profoundly frightening implications that undermine our democratic rights. This is an issue of utmost concern to anyone involved in any form of social and environmental activisim. Please join us to express your opposition to this growing threat.
|
|
As many of you know, RAP has recently engaged in the printing of a weekly newsletter. It is for reasons like this that the term SLAPP is now another of the many terms that will sadly become a part of our lives. We wanted you to be aware of the fact that new legislation is either in place or on the way that will end the threat of being sued while practicing your right to freedom of speech. |
We vow to pledge our support and lend all the assistance possible to the SLAPP Awareness Campaign. Which is a group of organized citizens aimed at holding peaceful rallies, public information forums, and information pickets at strategic locations throughout the US. The State of Virginia currently has no anti-SLAPP legislation in place, sadly. |
What Is The
"Chilling Effect" A chilling effect is a situation where speech or
conduct is suppressed or limited by fear of
penalization at the hands of an individual or
group. For example, the threat of a costly and
lengthy lawsuit might prompt self-censorship and
have a chilling effect on free speech. In United
States law, chilling effects refer to the stifling
effect that vague or overbroad laws may have on
legitimate speech and activity typically protected
by the First Amendment. Of course all of this is
just a broad term for suppression of freedom of
speech through intimidation and fear of
reprisals.
The Truth About The Stella Awards
|
The Stella Awards were inspired by Stella Liebeck. In 1992, Stella, then 79, spilled a cup of McDonald's coffee onto her lap, burning herself. A New Mexico jury awarded her $2.9 million in damages, but that's not the whole story. Ever since, the name "Stella Award" has been applied to any wild, outrageous, or ridiculous lawsuits -- including bogus cases! |
But there's also a deeper consideration here: are the people involved in SLAPP suits (a juror in the Court of Public Opinion) using the courts to redress justifiable grievances that can't otherwise be settled? ...Or are they trying to extort money from anyone they can? Are the lawyers involved champions of justice? ...Or are they helping to abuse the system in the name of getting a piece of the action? You be the judge! |
|
There is no shortage of examples of people who have used the legal system to cash in on a bad situation. The only thing that people tend to miss about this story is the fact that despite the outward appearance of a frivolous lawsuit, subsequent investigation turned up some startling details. In February 1992, Stella Liebeck of Albuquerque, New Mexico, was severely burned after spilling hot McDonald's Coffee on her lap. Far from being a frivolous award, the investigation into her case revealed upwards of 700 similar documented cases of similar burns proving that McDonald's knew its coffee was dangerously hot. Of course, at the very heart of this matter is the presence of corporate greed and indifference to the health and safety of our families. Yet these facts somehow seemed to be swept aside in the media. The Court Of Public Opinion won out over the obvious suffering of the victim here in this case. Was McDonalds the victim? We, the members of RAP, join in calling on you to direct your public officials to disallow any and all inappropriate and retaliatory counterclaims and SLAPP lawsuits aimed at stifling dissent amongst American citizens immediately and to stop the practice of allowing corporate society to violate our civil right toward freedom of speech. |
||||
|
Additional Sources
Write for a free informational packet on SLAPP's: SLAPP Resource Center. University of Denver School of Law 1900 Olive Street Denver, Colorado 80220 |
|
|
|
Freedom of speech is the concept of the inherent human right to voice one's opinion publicly without fear of censorship or punishment. The right is enshrined in the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights and is granted formal recognition by the laws of most nations. Nonetheless the degree to which the right is upheld in practice varies greatly from one corporate entity to another. More and more in our country, overt government censorship is enforced, while among liberals, censorship has been claimed to occur in a different form (propaganda) and there are different approaches to issues such as hate speech, obscenity, and defamation laws. Freedom of speech is a right that was paid for with the blood of our forefathers, let no entity take it away, give me freedom or give me death! |
|
A good book to read to learn more: |
Honoring Real Cases of Greedy Opportunists, Frivolous Lawsuits, And the Law Run Amok |
|
A good book to read to learn more: |
George W. Pring and Penelope Canan - Slapps: Getting Sued for Speaking Out |
|
A good book to read to learn more: |
Michelangelo Delfino and Mary E. Day - Be careful who you SLAPP |
|
A good book to read to learn more: |
Ralph Nader and Wesley J. Smith, No Contest: Corporate Lawyers and the Perversion of Justice in America, |
|
|