Dan Snyder Helping Politicians Recognize The Importance Of A Federal Anti-SLAPP Law

from the thanks-dan... dept

We've discussed a few times in the past the need for a federal anti-SLAPP law, rather than the weak state-by-state laws against SLAPP lawsuits, which are filed mainly to stifle speech, rather than for any legitimate purpose. Earlier this year, in particular, we discussed how the lawsuit filed by Washington Redskins owner Dan Snyder against a DC-publication, highlighted the need for a federal anti-SLAPP law. If you don't recall, Washington City Paper ran a silly anti-Snyder article that was clearly tongue in cheek. It's standard fans-bashing-ownership fare, which was mildly amusing if you were a Redskins fan. Rather than letting it pass, Snyder sued. Oddly, he sued in New York, leading to speculation that he was trying to avoid anti-SLAPP issues, despite everyone involved being in DC and/or Maryland -- both of which have stronger anti-SLAPP laws. Eventually, he did refile the suit closer to home, but the whole thing has convinced at least one lawmaker to move forward on a federal anti-SLAPP statute. In fact, Rep. Steve Cohen wrote an article claiming that Snyder's actions, in an attempt to stifle the speech of reporters critical of himself, is a big part of what's convinced him of the need for such a law, which is being dubbed the PETITION Act ("Protecting the Expression and Transmission of Ideas and Thoughts In Our Nation Act" -- ugh, so sick of these kinds of names):
The City Paper’s column was admittedly harsh but well within the bounds of free speech, especially about a public figure. Snyder was understandably angry, but instead of fighting speech with more speech, he chose to use the courts for his personal revenge. Whatever you may think of Snyder and the Redskins, the courts are not the appropriate forum for resolving these sorts of grudges.

Snyder's own attorney seemed to acknowledge the true intention of his lawsuit in a letter to the hedge fund that owns the newspaper, the original object of his suit. He wrote: "Mr. Snyder has more than sufficient means to protect his reputation and defend himself and his wife against your paper's concerted attempt at character assassination. We presume defending such litigation would not be a rational strategy for an investment firm such as yours. Indeed, the cost of litigation would presumably quickly outstrip the value of the Washington City Paper."

This is exactly what SLAPPs are all about. They are used to silence and harass critics by forcing them to spend countless time and resources defending against them. SLAPPs use the courts as a weapon to stifle participation in government and chill expression about matters of public interest.
Great to see renewed interest in a federal anti-SLAPP law (though, the details do matter). And, for that, we can thank Dan Snyder.
Hide this

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: anti-slapp, dan snyder, steve cohen


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • icon
    rubberpants (profile), 2 Jun 2011 @ 7:09pm

    I can't wait to see the convoluted and obtuse gymnastics the anonymous coward squadron engages in to disagree with this article. Seriously, this is going to be awesome.

    *gets popcorn*

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 2 Jun 2011 @ 8:21pm

    Actually, as a long suffering Redskins fan I find it hard to imagine that one could conceivably assassinate his character. He is a reviled douchebag in his own community whose conquest for football respectability leads him to endlessly sign marquee players in decline in the hopes of buying a Superbowl. The time-honored methodology is to build from the bottom up through the draft, but Snyder continuously meddles in football operations he knows nothing about- likely dooming the Redskins to the same esteem as the Detroit Lions for the remainder of his miserable life.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 2 Jun 2011 @ 8:49pm

    "Dan Snyder Helping Politicians Recognize The Importance Of A Federal Anti-SLAPP Law"

    If you want politicians to recognize anything, give them money. That's the one thing they recognize.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 2 Jun 2011 @ 9:20pm

    ugh, so sick of these kinds of names

    I may as well be the one to take the first step. From here on, I'll refer to that law as the "Free Speech Trumps Lawsuits Act".
    If enough people join in, maybe someday our nation will have laws that don't sound like 2x4 technology.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    iBelieve, 3 Jun 2011 @ 7:16am

    Sometimes it is better if we keep our thoughts and ideas to our...

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 4 Jun 2011 @ 8:05am

    Dan Snyder? Didn't he used to be the lead singer of...oh, wait. That was somebody else.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    dwg, 7 Jun 2011 @ 4:31pm

    SLAPPing back, too...

    California, for one, has an additional statute that protects against bogus anti-SLAPP motions. When the anti-SLAPP law was passed, every corporation that engaged in any kind of unethical or anti-competitive behavior, or (and especially) false advertising) all of a sudden tried to claim that these acts were in furtherance of their First Amendment rights. So the California legislature passed CCP 425.17, which allows motions to be brought against spurious anti-SLAPP motions, and allows the prevailing party to recover fees and costs on the motion.

    Man, those Californians think of everything.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Make this the First Word or Last Word. No thanks. (get credits or sign in to see balance)    
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Close

Add A Reply

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Make this the First Word or Last Word. No thanks. (get credits or sign in to see balance)    
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Special Affiliate Offer

Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Recent Stories

This site, like most other sites on the web, uses cookies. For more information, see our privacy policy. Got it
Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.