Gavin Howe
On January 8, 2025, Ohio became the 35th state to enact an anti-SLAPP statute, which took effect on April 9, 2025. The Uniform Public Expression Protection Act (UPEPA) was signed into law by Governor Mike DeWine, providing crucial protections against strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs). Prior to this, Ohio did not have an anti-SLAPP law, leaving its citizens vulnerable to costly and harassing defamation lawsuits aimed at stifling free speech. The new law ensures that meritorious cases can proceed without undue delay while providing an expedited remedy for those facing frivolous litigation.
| Characteristics | Values |
|---|---|
| Anti-SLAPP law status | Ohio enacted its first anti-SLAPP law on January 8, 2025, becoming the 35th state to do so. |
| Law name | Uniform Public Expression Protection Act (UPEPA) |
| Previous status | Ohio did not have an anti-SLAPP law before January 8, 2025. |
| Law effective date | April 9, 2025 |
| Purpose | To prevent abusive litigation, known as Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPP) or "SLAPP suits," aimed at silencing free speech through meritless defamation, privacy, or other nuisance claims. |
| Scope | Suits based on a person's exercise of speech, press, assembly, petition, or association rights "on a matter of public concern." Also applies to lawsuits based on communications in a government proceeding or on issues under consideration by government bodies. |
| Key provisions | Offers robust protections for free speech; defendants gain the right to immediate appeal if an anti-SLAPP motion is denied; winning defendants can recover legal costs and attorney fees. |
| Impact on meritorious claims | Ohio's anti-SLAPP law does not bar meritorious claims but asks litigants to demonstrate their validity before the discovery process. |
| Timeframe for motions | Ohio's law provides a relatively strict timeframe for filing and ruling on anti-SLAPP motions, ensuring meritorious cases can proceed without undue delay. |
| Legislative sponsors | State Senators Theresa Gavarone and Nathan Manning |
| Governor | Mike DeWine |
Explore related products
What You'll Learn
Ohio's Anti-SLAPP law and its limitations
On January 8, 2025, Ohio enacted its first anti-SLAPP legislation, becoming the 35th US state to do so. The Uniform Public Expression Protection Act (UPEPA) came into effect on April 9, 2025, and is designed to prevent abusive litigation, known as strategic lawsuits against public participation or SLAPPs.
UPEPA applies to lawsuits based on a person's communications in a legislative, executive, judicial, administrative, or other government proceeding. It also applies to communications on an issue under consideration by any of those bodies, and to suits based on a person's exercise of speech, press, assembly, petition, or association rights "on a matter of public concern."
Ohio's anti-SLAPP law does not bar meritorious claims but asks litigants to demonstrate the validity of those claims before engaging in the lengthy and expensive process of discovery. The law provides a relatively strict timeframe for filing and ruling on anti-SLAPP motions, ensuring that meritorious cases can proceed without undue delay. If a court grants a motion to dismiss a SLAPP lawsuit, it must also award reasonable attorneys' fees, court costs, and other reasonable litigation costs.
However, one limitation of Ohio's anti-SLAPP law is that it may present a challenge for lawyers and judges to navigate the new statutory scheme. The statutory language instructs courts to consider the need to promote uniformity of the law with respect to its subject matter among states that enact a substantially similar law. This means that courts will likely need to look to other jurisdictions with similar anti-SLAPP statutes for guidance in their application.
India's Environmental Laws: A Comprehensive Overview
You may want to see also
Explore related products
The Uniform Public Expression Protection Act (UPEPA)
The UPEPA gives defendants the right to immediately appeal a denial of an anti-SLAPP motion. It also allows defendants to file an anti-SLAPP motion in court, which automatically halts discovery and all other proceedings until the court rules on the motion. This minimizes litigation costs for defendants.
UPEPA instructs judges to interpret the statute broadly and/or liberally to protect free expression rights. It protects all expression on matters of public concern, including speech, press, assembly, and petition rights.
Ohio is the tenth state to adopt the UPEPA, with Governor Mike DeWine signing it into law on January 8, 2025, and the law taking effect on April 9, 2025. Ohio's anti-SLAPP law does not bar meritorious claims but asks litigants to demonstrate the validity of those claims before engaging in the costly process of discovery.
Understanding India's National Company Law Tribunal
You may want to see also
Explore related products
![Goosebumps 2 [With Bonus Content]](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/919yaM8shLL._AC_UY218_.jpg)
The impact of Anti-SLAPP laws on defamation lawsuits
On January 8, 2025, Ohio enacted an anti-SLAPP statute, becoming the 35th US state to do so. The Uniform Public Expression Protection Act (UPEPA) is designed to prevent abusive litigation, or strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs), aimed at silencing free speech through meritless defamation, privacy, or other nuisance claims.
Anti-SLAPP laws are intended to prevent people from using the courts and the potential threat of a lawsuit to intimidate people who are exercising their First Amendment rights. They are a powerful tool for those facing retaliatory speech-based claims and enable defendants to get defamation lawsuits dismissed quickly if the speech at issue is of public concern or if the plaintiff has a low probability of winning the lawsuit.
In states without anti-SLAPP laws, those targeted by SLAPP suits can face substantial expenses and hardship with little opportunity for redress. If a motion to dismiss fails, the plaintiff can begin the discovery process, demanding documents, depositions, etc. This can be expensive and harassing. Even if a defendant wins a frivolous SLAPP suit, they are only entitled to the actual costs incurred during litigation and are not entitled to recover attorney's fees.
However, anti-SLAPP laws do not bar meritorious claims. They simply ask litigants to demonstrate the validity of those claims before engaging in the lengthy and expensive process of discovery.
Auditing Law Courses at WashU: A Guide
You may want to see also
The First Amendment and free speech
The First Amendment to the United States Constitution protects freedom of speech and the right to petition the government. It states that "Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech." This protection of free speech is a cherished value, and the Supreme Court has often struggled to define what constitutes protected speech. For example, the First Amendment protects the right not to salute the flag or to wear black armbands to school to protest a war. It also protects the use of certain offensive words and phrases to convey political messages and the right of students to print articles in a school newspaper over the objections of the school administration.
In the context of anti-SLAPP laws, the First Amendment is relevant because SLAPP suits are strategic lawsuits against public participation that aim to silence free speech through meritless defamation, privacy, or other nuisance claims. Anti-SLAPP laws are designed to protect individuals from these types of abusive litigations that infringe upon their First Amendment rights.
Ohio recently became the 35th state to enact an anti-SLAPP law, with Governor Mike DeWine signing the Uniform Public Expression Protection Act ("UPEPA") into law on January 8, 2025. This law applies to suits based on a person's exercise of speech, press, assembly, petition, or association rights on a matter of public concern. It also covers lawsuits based on a person's communications in a government proceeding or on an issue under consideration by a government body.
Ohio's anti-SLAPP law provides a mechanism to challenge defamation lawsuits or other speech-based claims that may infringe on free speech principles protected by the First Amendment. The law does not bar meritorious claims but asks litigants to demonstrate the validity of their claims before engaging in the costly process of discovery. It also provides a strict timeframe for filing and ruling on anti-SLAPP motions to ensure that meritorious cases can proceed without undue delay.
Laws of India: A Comprehensive Guide to Indian Legislation
You may want to see also
The cost of SLAPP suits
In states without anti-SLAPP laws, the targets of SLAPP suits may face significant financial hardship and limited opportunities for redress. They may be forced to incur the costs of litigation, including filing fees, court reporter fees, and attorney's fees, even if they successfully defend against a frivolous SLAPP suit. The process of defending against a SLAPP suit can be expensive and harassing, as the plaintiff can demand documents, depositions, and other discovery requests.
Even if a defendant prevails in a SLAPP suit, they may still be left with substantial legal costs. For example, in a 2021 libel action, journalist Catherine Belton was forced to pay legal costs of £1.5 million, despite successfully defending against a SLAPP suit brought by Russian oligarchs.
To mitigate the financial burden of SLAPP suits, some states have enacted anti-SLAPP laws that allow defendants to recover their legal costs and attorney's fees. Ohio, for example, enacted an anti-SLAPP law in 2025 that provides a relatively strict timeframe for filing and ruling on anti-SLAPP motions, helping to prevent the burden and cost of defending against frivolous lawsuits.
Overall, the cost of SLAPP suits can be significant, both for the targets of the suits and for society as a whole, as they can stifle free speech and public debate. Anti-SLAPP laws are important tools to help reduce the financial burden and protect free speech.
Understanding Immovable Property as per Indian Law
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
Yes, Ohio enacted an anti-SLAPP law on January 8, 2025, becoming the 35th state to do so.
The anti-SLAPP law in Ohio is called the Uniform Public Expression Protection Act (UPEPA) and it aims to prevent Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPPs) that infringe upon citizens' First Amendment rights.
The purpose of Ohio's anti-SLAPP law is to protect individuals and organizations from frivolous and meritless lawsuits that attempt to intimidate and silence them through costly and burdensome legal procedures.
Ohio's anti-SLAPP law provides a framework for courts to evaluate cases on constitutional grounds at the outset. It allows defendants the right to immediate appeal if an anti-SLAPP motion is denied and enables winning defendants to recover legal costs and attorney fees.
