Iowa Senate passes anti-SLAPP bill providing free speech, press protections
The Iowa Senate unanimously passed a bill Wednesday that would provide protection against lawsuits aimed at limiting constitutional freedoms of speech and press.
The legislation, House File 472, is known as an anti-SLAPP bill — referring to a measure intended to combat 'strategic lawsuits against public participation,' or SLAPP lawsuits. These are civil lawsuits filed by organizations or individuals against entities such as news organizations or activists not with the expectation of winning the case, but to discourage them from publishing articles or speaking publicly on an issue by engaging them in a long, expensive legal battle.
'In most cases, these actual tort claims for defamation or other related theories are weak and (lack) merit, but those purposes are tied to the speaker's legal fees and make them back down,' Sen. Jeff Reichman, R-Montrose, the floor manager for the bill, said.
The measure would provide protections for those facing such lawsuits by allowing expedited relief in court for cases related to First Amendment rights, including freedoms of speech and press.
The House has passed anti-SLAPP bills in several previous legislative sessions with bipartisan support that have failed to advance in the Senate. During House debate on the bill, Rep. Steven Holt, R-Denison, said he has attempted to pass anti-SLAPP measures since 2018. Those efforts were in response to a 2018 lawsuit against the Carroll Times Herald filed by a Carroll police officer who sued the newspaper after reporting that he had sexual relationships with teenagers, which the officer had admitted to. While the judge dismissed the case, the legal dispute 'almost put them out of business,' Holt said.
Though no senators but Reichman spoke on the bill Wednesday, the measure was unanimously approved by the chamber.
The Senate amended the legislation to state the protections only apply to civil actions filed on or after the bill's enactment — removing a provision in the original House bill that expedited relief could also be granted to a 'cause of action asserted in a civil action.' With the bill's passage in the Senate, it moves back to the House for approval of the amendment before it can go to Gov. Kim Reynolds.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
a few seconds ago
- The Hill
Trump taps conservative economist EJ Antoni to serve as next labor statistics chief
President Trump on Monday announced he would nominate E.J. Antoni, a top economist at the conservative Heritage Foundation, to serve as the next commissioner of the Bureau of Labor Statistics after he pushed out the previous leader. 'Our Economy is booming, and E.J. will ensure that the Numbers released are HONEST and ACCURATE,' Trump posted on Truth Social. 'I know E.J. Antoni will do an incredible job in this new role. Congratulations E.J.!' Antoni is the chief economist at the Heritage Foundation and previously contributed to Project 2025's policy rubric, which outlined potential moves for the next GOP administration during the 2024 campaign. Antoni has in the past expressed skepticism about data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. He recently appeared on conservative firebrand Steve Bannon's podcast to urge Trump to fire the previous commissioner, Erika McEntarfer. The position requires Senate confirmation, but Republicans hold a 53-47 GOP majority, giving Antoni a path to the job even if there are defections. Trump earlier this month ordered the firing of McEntarfer, a Biden White House appointee who was confirmed with a large bipartisan majority in the Senate in 2024. The move came after the jobs report released in early August showed lower-than-expected hiring in July and major downward revisions to the jobs reports from May and June. While Trump and his allies argued it was a move intended to improve transparency and accuracy, critics noted McEntarfer had little to do with what the numbers showed. Economists and lawmakers also expressed concern that it would erode credibility and confidence in government data, hurting businesses and consumers in the process.
New York Post
30 minutes ago
- New York Post
Ex-Kentucky clerk Kim Davis asks Supreme Court to overturn same-sex marriage ruling: ‘Legal fiction'
Kim Davis, the former Kentucky clerk who violated the rights of a gay couple, has petitioned the Supreme Court to revisit its landmark decision on same-sex marriage – slamming the ruling as a 'legal fiction.' Davis, 59, served five days in jail in 2015 after she refused to issue a marriage license to gay couple David Ermold and David Moore shortly after the Supreme Court legalized same-sex marriage nationwide in the Obergefell v. Hodges case. The former Rowan County, Ky., clerk was subsequently ordered to pay a $100,000 jury verdict for emotional damages and $260,000 in attorneys' fees to the married couple. Advertisement She asked the high court – in a 90-page filing last month – to review a lower court's 2022 finding that she violated Ermold and Moore's constitutional right to marry and revisit its decision in the same-sex marriage case. 3 Davis claims her First Amendment rights were violated when she was jailed and ordered to pay damages to the gay couple she refused to grant a marriage license to. AP 'If ever a case deserved review, the first individual who was thrown in jail post-Obergefell for seeking accommodation for her religious beliefs should be it,' Liberty Counsel, the nonprofit law firm representing Davis, wrote in the petition. Advertisement 'Davis was jailed, haled before a jury, and now faces crippling monetary damages based on nothing more than purported emotional distress,' the filing continued, arguing that Davis was protected by her First Amendment rights to freedom of speech and religion in denying the marriage licences. The petition also asks the justices to consider 'whether Obergefell v. Hodges … and the legal fiction of substantive due process, should be overturned.' 3 The Supreme Court previously turned down a chance to review Davis' case in 2020. REUTERS 'Kim Davis' case underscores why the US Supreme Court should overturn the wrongly decided Obergefell v. Hodges opinion because it threatens the religious liberty of Americans who believe that marriage is a sacred union between one man and one woman,' Mat Staver, the founder and chairman of Liberty Counsel, said in a statement. Advertisement 'Obergefell cannot just push the First Amendment aside to punish individuals for their beliefs about marriage,' Staver added. 'The First Amendment precludes making the choice between your faith and your livelihood.' 'The High Court now has the opportunity to finally overturn this egregious opinion from 2015.' 3 The Supreme Court legalized same-sex marriage nationwide in 2015. REUTERS William Powell, an attorney for Ermold and Moore, told The Post that he is 'confident' the Supreme Court won't take up Davis' case. Advertisement 'We are confident the Supreme Court, like the court of appeals, will conclude that Davis's arguments do not merit further attention,' Powell, who serves as senior counsel at Georgetown University's Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection, said in a statement. 'Marriage equality is settled law,' he added. The Supreme Court previously denied a 2020 petition from Davis to consider her appeal.
The Hill
30 minutes ago
- The Hill
Abbott: Texas can ‘eliminate' 10 Democratic districts in response to California
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R) warned that Texas could get rid of as many as 10 Democratic districts if California moved ahead with its plan to redraw its House map and neutralize the expected GOP gains in the Lone Star State. 'Listen, all those big blue states, they've already gerrymandered,' Abbott told CNN's Jake Tapper on Monday, when asked if he was concerned about a redistricting arms race as Texas moves forward to create new congressional lines. 'Look at the map of Illinois. Look at the map of California, New York and Massachusetts, and so many other blue states they gerrymandered a long time ago. They got nothing left with regard to what they can do,' Abbott said. 'And know this: If California tries to gerrymander, find more districts, listen, Texas has the ability to eliminate 10 Democrats in our state.' Abbott's remarks underscore how Republicans plan to be as aggressive as possible in trying to knock off as many Democrats as they can. Right now, the state has 25 House Republicans and 12 Democrats, in addition to one vacancy waiting to be filled after the late Rep. Sylvester Turner (D-Texas) died in March. So far, the Texas GOP's new map is looking to make five pickup opportunities for the party next year. But Texas Republicans' efforts to pass new congressional lines are stalled as Democrats have fled the state to deny the GOP a quorum, or the minimum number of lawmakers needed present to conduct business. As the redistricting war heats up, blue states have signaled they're moving ahead with their own redistricting plans. California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) announced last week that he would be calling for a special session in November as Democrats in the Golden State look to pass a new House map that looks to offset the gains Republicans are hoping to make in Texas with their new map. New York and Illinois have also signaled they're exploring their options over how to redraw their maps in response to Texas. Meanwhile, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) has signaled readiness to revisit his state's maps while Missouri and Indiana could also revisit their congressional maps.
