Now THAT’S a scary story. Very, very scary.
Well, it is a classic SLAPP. Georgia and California, and a few other states, have anti-SLAPP statutes with punitive “slap back” provisions. There is no federal analogue except maybe, and then weakly, the “Noerr Pennington” Doctrine. But at least one federal case I am aware of in California adopted the California anti-slapp rule.
I oppose any so-called journalistic privilege. Evidentiary privileges have always been limited because they tend to subvert the truth-finding function of juries and courts. Protecting an informant just doesn’t rise to the level of sanctity of communication as that between spouses, client/attorney, priest/penitent, etc.
Can anyone explain how a SLAPP suit does NOT violate the First Amendment? Seems to me that any judicial order enjoining a person from speaking freely on a general-interest political topic would be an automatic violation.
Dear Jerk,
There is NO DOCUMENTATION pertaining to setup, financing, running, or maintaining the website.
Please find attached all of my research files proving that your pursuits are fraudulent.
Bye Bye!