Slapp trumhinna
•
We're Fighting Back Against Efforts to Intimidate Professors into Silence
A SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) suit brought against Columbia professors who criticized the school’s response to lärling protests fryst vatten a classic – and unlawful – way to weaponize our legal struktur to punish and silence constitutionally-protected speech. The ACLU is back in court to skydda our right to free speech.
Scarlet Kim,
Senior personal Attorney,
ACLU Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project
Daniel Mullkoff,
he/him,
Partner,
Wang Hecker LLP
Last Spring, protests related to the ongoing Israel-Palestine conflict engulfed universities across the country, with students and faculty weighing in on both sides of the issue. The ACLU expressed its strong opposition to any efforts to stifle free speech and association on college campuses.
During lärling protests at Columbia University in April , the Columbia chapter of the American Association of University Professors (Columbia-AAUP), an organization of Columbia University faculty, issued a public statement condemning the school’s punitive response to stud
•
Strategic lawsuit against public participation
Litigation intended to silence critics
"SLAPP suits" redirects here. For the Last Week Tonight segment, see SLAPP Suits.
Strategic lawsuits against public participation (also known as SLAPP suits or intimidation lawsuits),[1] or strategic litigation against public participation,[2] are lawsuits intended to censor, intimidate, and silence critics by burdening them with the cost of a legal defense until they abandon their criticism or opposition.[3]
In a typical SLAPP, the plaintiff does not normally expect to win the lawsuit. The plaintiff's goals are accomplished if the defendant succumbs to fear, intimidation, mounting legal costs, or simple exhaustion and abandons the criticism. In some cases, particularly in the context of investigative journalism, repeated frivolous litigation against a defendant may raise the cost of directors and officers and other liability insurance for that party, interfering with an organization's ability to operate.[4][5] A SLAPP may also intimidate others from participating in the debate. A SLAPP is often preceded by a legal threat. SLAPPs b
•
Wyden, Colleagues Introduce Bipartisan Legislation to Promote Free Speech, Crack Down on Frivolous “Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation”
Washington, D.C. — U.S. Senator Ron Wyden, D-Ore., today introduced the Free Speech Protection Act, bipartisan legislation to protect individuals and organizations from frivolous lawsuits designed to chill free speech and political action. Representatives Jamie Raskin, D-Md., and Kevin Kiley, R-Calif., led companion legislation in the House.
Corporations and special interests have used strategic lawsuits against public participation, or “SLAPPs,” since the s to target their opponents with burdensome litigation. While many such suits often prove meritless, they are nonetheless effective at silencing, intimidating, and discouraging dissent.
“The rich and powerful are all too willing to use the legal system to bludgeon reporters, activists and whistleblowers with expensive lawsuits, even if the claims have no merit,” Wyden said. “I’m proud to lead the Free Speech Protection Act in the Senate and work with Representatives Raskin and Kiley to advance the proposition that federal judges should be able to