A new law protects Pa. citizens from retaliatory lawsuits for speaking out

In Pennsylvania, the math has favored the powerful. For a little more than $300, real estate developers and political figures have long been able to file baseless conspiracy and defamation lawsuits against their critics, plunging them into protracted, costly court battles.

Registered community organizations, #MeToo advocates, and social media users are among those who have buckled under the weight of this form of legal retaliation, known best by its acronym, SLAPP, for strategic lawsuits against public participation.

A new state law promises to push back against a “disturbing increase” in SLAPP cases, and provide citizens with a badly needed layer of free speech protection.

House Bill 1466, which was signed into law Wednesday by Gov. Josh Shapiro, will enable defendants to file a special motion to have their cases quickly dismissed, based on protected public expression immunity — an umbrella that covers communication on issues that are under consideration in legislative, executive, or judicial arenas, and the rights of freedom of speech and freedom of the press on matters of public concern.

“This is more important than ever,” said David Keating, president of the Washington-based Institute for Free Speech, a nonprofit focused on protecting First Amendment political speech rights.

In 2022, the institute estimated that, in states with poor anti-SLAPP laws, defeating a meritless defamation lawsuit could cost a defendant $21,000 to $55,000. In some instances, that price tag could rise to hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Few social media users, Keating said, understand that an offhand post — a bad Yelp review here, a pointed Facebook community comment there — could result in being on the receiving end of a costly, vengeful lawsuit.

“Even totally frivolous lawsuits can make your life really miserable,” he said.

» READ MORE: ‘Court-assisted terrorism’? How the powerful can muzzle free speech for about $300.

Under the new law, if a Pennsylvania judge determines that a lawsuit has been filed to harass, punish, or intimidate a defendant, the case could be quickly tossed — and the plaintiff would be ordered to pay the defendant’s attorney’s fees and court costs. Defendants could also be awarded punitive damages.

“I think the number of SLAPPs is going to go down a lot,” Keating said. “It’s a totally different dynamic.”

This isn’t the first time that Pennsylvania legislators recognized that they needed to strengthen the state’s meager anti-SLAPP defenses, which had, since 2000, applied narrowly to citizens who spoke out about environmental issues. Then-State Sen. Larry Farnese introduced anti-SLAPP bills in 2015, 2017, and 2019, but each of those measures failed to make it to a governor’s desk.

In 2023, State Rep. Ryan Bizzarro (D., Erie County) introduced House Bill 1466, which was based, in part, on the Public Expression Protection Act, model legislation that was developed by the Uniform Law Commission, a conference of lawyers, judges and law professors.

Since 2020, the protection act has been enacted in red and blue states alike, including Maine, New Jersey, Kentucky, and Utah.

On its website, Keating’s institute lists a range of people and groups that have benefited in states with strong anti-SLAPP laws, from conservative Christians and Hollywood filmmakers, to environmental activists and anti-abortion groups.

“It’s always been a bipartisan issue,” Keating said.

“The fact that most of these [bills] are passing nearly unanimously is a very good sign for continued progress. It shows that, even in this polarized age, if you bring a lot of thought into a problem that needs fixing, and you bring a lot of attention to it, you can still solve that problem.”

Bizzarro’s bill made it through Pennsylvania’s house and senate without opposition.

To help shore up support, legislators invoked a Philadelphia cautionary tale: the plight of the Old City Civic Association.

» READ MORE: Burdened by legal fees, Old City civic disbands

Formed in 1973, the association was run by volunteers who had the unglamorous task of making sure developers followed the city’s zoning rules when they tried to convert parcels of the historic neighborhood — with its cobblestone streets and 18th-century charm — into investment opportunities.

In 2012, one company sued the civic association for more than $3 million, blaming the group for a development deal that fizzled. A pub owner sued the association that same year for opposing his plans for a new restaurant.

Neither lawsuit was successful, but that didn’t matter to the civic association’s insurance carrier, which dropped the group’s coverage. Quotes for new insurance were 10 times higher, and came with a punishing deductible, the association’s president said at the time.

If the association continued on without insurance and was sued again, its individual members would have been personally saddled with crippling legal bills.

So, in 2013, the civic association disbanded.

Joe Schiavo, who served as vice chair of the civic association’s zoning committee, later described the lawsuits that toppled the neighborhood group as “court-assisted terrorism.”

Steve Huntington serves as the zoning committee chair of the Philadelphia Crosstown Coalition, a nonprofit network of registered community organizations. Huntington said he thought the state’s new anti-SLAPP provisions would have led to a quick dismissal of the lawsuits that felled the Old City Civic Association.

“It’s great to have [the law] now,” he said, “but it would have been great to have had it 10 years ago, too.”

» READ MORE: A Northeast neighborhood group may be forced to disband after fight over UPS warehouse

Another longtime neighborhood group, the Greater Bustleton Civic League, was sued in 2023 by a developer for objecting to a plan to open a large UPS warehouse on Red Lion Road.

The civic league, which had existed for 80 years, lost its directors and operators insurance, and considered folding altogether. The league managed to find a new insurer, but its premium soared by thousands of dollars.

Huntington said he hopes the state will adopt additional measures to its new law, such as requiring plaintiffs to pay the cost of any increase to a defendant’s insurance premium.