TCPA At Risk

TCPA at Risk

Since its unanimous passage in 2011, the TCPA has disposed of innumerable meritless lawsuits filed in retaliation for Texans exercising their First Amendment rights to speak freely, to petition, and to associate. The TCPA is often referred to as the Anti-SLAPP statute (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation).

The TCPA has been used to protect countless individuals, organizations and public officials including: domestic violence victims; online commenters; people who report wrongdoing to police, the media, or the government; candidates for public office; investigative reporters; law enforcement; and more, when meritless lawsuits have been filed against them for exercising their First Amendment rights.

Texas is one of 35 states with an Anti-SLAPP law and is considered one of the strongest in the nation. The TCPA has served as a model for several other states and organizations which have passed similar legislation into law since 2011.

| For the rich, free speech — for everyone else, a SLAPP in the face

This week the House Judiciary Committee will here HB 2988, a dangerous bill that will destroy fourteen years of free speech protections for Texas citizens.

In 2011, the legislature passed vital protections for freedom of speech in the Texas Citizens Participation Act. On Wednesday, they’re looking to gut it. The TCPA addresses the common problem of “strategic lawsuits against public participation,” or SLAPPs. These are frivolous lawsuits brought by the wealthy or powerful against private citizens to stop them from exercising
their free speech rights.

When Texans are slapped with lawsuits for exercising their First Amendment rights, Texas law allows them to recover the attorneys’ fees they spend fighting the case. The ability to recover those fees not only helps make Texans whole after a frivolous lawsuit, it also helps to deter such suits in the first place. But the right to recover those fees is now under threat by a bill in the Texas Legislature – leaving only the rich with the opportunity to speak freely.

Eliminating the fees provision would only embolden SLAPP bullies, further clog the court system with these frivolous cases, and undermine the ability of Texans to protect their First Amendment rights. The Legislature should reject HB 2988.

| The Proposal: SB 336/HB 2459 – A Dangerous Overcorrection and 
HB 2988 – A Bounty on the Head of Those Who Speak Out

Proponents of TCPA “reform” themselves are prohibiting free-speech proponents from being heard, masking their prior support for the law, and misstating statistics about how many TCPA cases there are in the appellate courts.

The TCPA protects people from meritless lawsuits targeting their free speech rights in a number of ways. First, if the lawsuit is aimed at a protected activity, it requires the person who filed the lawsuit to show that their claim has some merit. Next, if they cannot do so or if an affirmative defense applies, the case is dismissed under the TCPA. If the TCPA motion is denied, then a stay of the case is put in place while the appellate courts review the matter. This is key to maintain the protection of constitutional rights while the overseeing court determines if the trial court got it right or wrong.

SB 336/HB 2459 have been introduced by opponents of the law who advocate for the removal of the stay of litigation while a TCPA motion is appealed even though trial courts rule incorrectly more times than they rule correctly on the areas opponents target. Also, by opening the door to force citizens to fight on two-fronts (at the trial and appellate court simultaneously), the SLAPP victim is further punished for exercising their free speech rights, and the already overburdened court system will be clogged with extraneous litigation that will take years to undo.

And, just as certain voices were kept from being heard at the House Interim Committee hearing, changing the law as suggested in SB 336/HB 2459 would enable trial courts to weaponize the TCPA against speech they don’t like.

Finally, SB 336/HB 2459 would inevitably increase litigation costs and drive insurance carriers out of the market or result in higher premiums for all.

An even more dangerous proposal is HB 2988 by Rep. Mano Ayala which would put a bounty on the head of anyone who speaks out in Texas. It would remove the key feature of mandatory attorney’s fees which gives teeth to the law by providing a strong disincentive against filing frivolous lawsuits to punish speakers. Worse yet, the vague language in HB 2988 could even allow a court to shift fees to a SLAPP plaintiff, rather than the SLAPP victim making Texas speakers fear even using the protections under the law.  

Editorials

Protecting the Democratic Process

The Texas Supreme Court has described the TCPA as having a “unique role in protecting the democratic process that allows our state to function.” We need to preserve the integrity of this law and make any revisions to it in a thoughtful manner. SB 336/HB 2459 proponents and advocates for change seek to target free speech protections rather than consider the larger issues of congested courts and abusive tactics employed by undisciplined lawyers who take advantage of interlocutory appeals as a whole. Both proposals have been resoundingly rejected. 

The heart and soul of this statute must be preserved. The Texas Legislature shouldn’t allow this effective and equitable law to be eviscerated and the citizens of Texas to be deprived of its free speech protections.

TCPA at Risk

Since its unanimous passage in 2011, the TCPA has disposed of innumerable meritless lawsuits filed in retaliation for Texans exercising their First Amendment rights to speak freely, to petition, and to associate. The TCPA is often referred to as the Anti-SLAPP statute (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation).

The TCPA has been used to protect countless individuals, organizations and public officials including: domestic violence victims; online commenters; people who report wrongdoing to police, the media, or the government; candidates for public office; investigative reporters; law enforcement; and more, when meritless lawsuits have been filed against them for exercising their First Amendment rights.

Texas is one of 35 states with an Anti-SLAPP law and is considered one of the strongest in the nation. The TCPA has served as a model for several other states and organizations which have passed similar legislation into law since 2011.

| For the rich, free speech — for everyone else, a SLAPP in the face

| The Proposal: SB 336/HB 2459 – A Dangerous Overcorrection and 
HB 2988 – A Bounty on the Head of Those Who Speak Out

Proponents of TCPA “reform” themselves are prohibiting free-speech proponents from being heard, masking their prior support for the law, and misstating statistics about how many TCPA cases there are in the appellate courts.

The TCPA protects people from meritless lawsuits targeting their free speech rights in a number of ways. First, if the lawsuit is aimed at a protected activity, it requires the person who filed the lawsuit to show that their claim has some merit. Next, if they cannot do so or if an affirmative defense applies, the case is dismissed under the TCPA. If the TCPA motion is denied, then a stay of the case is put in place while the appellate courts review the matter. This is key to maintain the protection of constitutional rights while the overseeing court determines if the trial court got it right or wrong.

SB 336/HB 2459 have been introduced by opponents of the law who advocate for the removal of the stay of litigation while a TCPA motion is appealed even though trial courts rule incorrectly more times than they rule correctly on the areas opponents target. Also, by opening the door to force citizens to fight on two-fronts (at the trial and appellate court simultaneously), the SLAPP victim is further punished for exercising their free speech rights, and the already overburdened court system will be clogged with extraneous litigation that will take years to undo.

And, just as certain voices were kept from being heard at the House Interim Committee hearing, changing the law as suggested in SB 336/HB 2459 would enable trial courts to weaponize the TCPA against speech they don’t like.

Finally, SB 336/HB 2459 would inevitably increase litigation costs and drive insurance carriers out of the market or result in higher premiums for all.

An even more dangerous proposal is HB 2988 by Rep. Mano Ayala which would put a bounty on the head of anyone who speaks out in Texas. It would remove the key feature of mandatory attorney’s fees which gives teeth to the law by providing a strong disincentive against filing frivolous lawsuits to punish speakers. Worse yet, the vague language in HB 2988 could even allow a court to shift fees to a SLAPP plaintiff, rather than the SLAPP victim making Texas speakers fear even using the protections under the law.  

Editorials

Protecting the Democratic Process

The Texas Supreme Court has described the TCPA as having a “unique role in protecting the democratic process that allows our state to function.” We need to preserve the integrity of this law and make any revisions to it in a thoughtful manner. SB 336/HB 2459 proponents and advocates for change seek to target free speech protections rather than consider the larger issues of congested courts and abusive tactics employed by undisciplined lawyers who take advantage of interlocutory appeals as a whole. Both proposals have been resoundingly rejected. 

The heart and soul of this statute must be preserved. The Texas Legislature shouldn’t allow this effective and equitable law to be eviscerated and the citizens of Texas to be deprived of its free speech protections.

TCPA at Risk

Since its unanimous passage in 2011, the TCPA has disposed of innumerable meritless lawsuits filed in retaliation for Texans exercising their First Amendment rights to speak freely, to petition, and to associate. The TCPA is often referred to as the Anti-SLAPP statute (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation).

The TCPA has been used to protect countless individuals, organizations and public officials including: domestic violence victims; online commenters; people who report wrongdoing to police, the media, or the government; candidates for public office; investigative reporters; law enforcement; and more, when meritless lawsuits have been filed against them for exercising their First Amendment rights.

Texas is one of 35 states with an Anti-SLAPP law and is considered one of the strongest in the nation. The TCPA has served as a model for several other states and organizations which have passed similar legislation into law since 2011.

| For the rich, free speech — for everyone else, a SLAPP in the face

| The Proposal: SB 336/HB 2459 – A Dangerous Overcorrection and 
HB 2988 – A Bounty on the Head of Those Who Speak Out

Proponents of TCPA “reform” themselves are prohibiting free-speech proponents from being heard, masking their prior support for the law, and misstating statistics about how many TCPA cases there are in the appellate courts.

The TCPA protects people from meritless lawsuits targeting their free speech rights in a number of ways. First, if the lawsuit is aimed at a protected activity, it requires the person who filed the lawsuit to show that their claim has some merit. Next, if they cannot do so or if an affirmative defense applies, the case is dismissed under the TCPA. If the TCPA motion is denied, then a stay of the case is put in place while the appellate courts review the matter. This is key to maintain the protection of constitutional rights while the overseeing court determines if the trial court got it right or wrong.

SB 336/HB 2459 have been introduced by opponents of the law who advocate for the removal of the stay of litigation while a TCPA motion is appealed even though trial courts rule incorrectly more times than they rule correctly on the areas opponents target. Also, by opening the door to force citizens to fight on two-fronts (at the trial and appellate court simultaneously), the SLAPP victim is further punished for exercising their free speech rights, and the already overburdened court system will be clogged with extraneous litigation that will take years to undo.

And, just as certain voices were kept from being heard at the House Interim Committee hearing, changing the law as suggested in SB 336/HB 2459 would enable trial courts to weaponize the TCPA against speech they don’t like.

Finally, SB 336/HB 2459 would inevitably increase litigation costs and drive insurance carriers out of the market or result in higher premiums for all.

An even more dangerous proposal is HB 2988 by Rep. Mano Ayala which would put a bounty on the head of anyone who speaks out in Texas. It would remove the key feature of mandatory attorney’s fees which gives teeth to the law by providing a strong disincentive against filing frivolous lawsuits to punish speakers. Worse yet, the vague language in HB 2988 could even allow a court to shift fees to a SLAPP plaintiff, rather than the SLAPP victim making Texas speakers fear even using the protections under the law.  

Editorials

Protecting the Democratic Process

The Texas Supreme Court has described the TCPA as having a “unique role in protecting the democratic process that allows our state to function.” We need to preserve the integrity of this law and make any revisions to it in a thoughtful manner. SB 336/HB 2459 proponents and advocates for change seek to target free speech protections rather than consider the larger issues of congested courts and abusive tactics employed by undisciplined lawyers who take advantage of interlocutory appeals as a whole. Both proposals have been resoundingly rejected. 

The heart and soul of this statute must be preserved. The Texas Legislature shouldn’t allow this effective and equitable law to be eviscerated and the citizens of Texas to be deprived of its free speech protections.

Who We Are

Learn More

Who TCPA Helps

Learn More

How Can You Help?

Home
Contact
Who Are We
News
TCPA At Risk
Join Us
TCPA Helps