
Texas legislation could weaken protections against frivolous lawsuits, warn free speech advocates
Free speech advocates in Texas are warning about new bills being considered in the state that they say would weaken protections for ordinary citizens and journalists against intimidating lawsuits.
Lawsuits launched by powerful and deep-pocketed interests for the purpose of silencing and effectively harassing people exercising free speech rights are known as SLAPPs (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation). The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press describes SLAPPs as being filed "for intimidating and silencing criticism through expensive, baseless legal proceedings."
The 2011 Texas Citizens Participation Act (TCPA) was passed as a way to empower defendants against such suits, advocates say, but now they say it's under attack in a threat to free speech across the political spectrum.
The current law allows defendants who feel they are the victims of unfair SLAPP lawsuits to move to quickly dismiss them and be awarded attorneys' fees if successful. HB 2988, which is set to proceed to a hearing on Wednesday in the state's House Judiciary & Civil Jurisprudence committee, is being criticized as a way to gut the TCPA.
"Any time someone exposes an uncomfortable truth or an opposing view, they can easily be a SLAPP victim, and these laws are the only things that give them power against the bullies in the courtroom," First Amendment attorney Laura Prather told Fox News Digital.
"It's a form of judicial harassment, where you're really just trying to lock somebody up in a lengthy legal battle because they expressed an opinion that you didn't like or they exposed wrongdoing that you didn't like," she added.
In journalism, anti-SLAPP laws are meant to protect journalists from being besieged by defamation or other lawsuits as a means of intimidation, given the expense and difficulty involved in being wrapped up in lengthy court proceedings.
Under the TCPA, a speaker who had been sued in a SLAPP case that was dismissed would receive attorney's fees and costs, and the law also allowed the court to award sanctions against the plaintiff. However, HB 2988 would make the awarding of attorney's fees discretionary instead of mandatory, and potentially put a defendant on the hook for the plaintiff's legal fees at a judge's discretion.
The TCPA also includes an automatic stay of discovery, meaning defendants using its protections can avoid the arduous and intrusive process of exchanging information, documents and other materials before a trial. SB 336, which has an identical companion bill in the House, HB 2459, would repeal that provision that stays discovery and trial in a SLAPP case "until such time that an appeals court has ruled, if asked to do so, on an anti-SLAPP motion," according to an article in the Institute for Free Speech.
"If this bill passes, anyone targeted by a SLAPP lawsuit in Texas will have to battle in trial court and appeal court simultaneously," conservative commentator Ben Ferguson wrote about SB 336 in Human Events. "That's not just a procedural change—it's a death sentence for small media outlets, grassroots conservatives, and people like me who rely on that protection to survive the legal attacks hurled our way."
"The TCPA protects Texans across the ideological spectrum, from grassroots activists to government watchdogs to on-line reviewers," James Bopp, general counsel of the National Right to Life Committee, wrote last week. "Weakening the TCPA would embolden litigious corporations, political operatives, and deep-pocketed individuals to use the courts as a cudgel against their opponents. The impact would be devastating not just for those sued, but for the fundamental principles of free speech and open debate in Texas."
Supporters of the proposals say the anti-SLAPP law can be used mischievously to gum up court proceedings and delay litigation on matters unrelated to free speech. The Texas Tribune reported on one example involving a contractor who filed an anti-SLAPP motion to halt a case brought by a developer over an apartment construction project. The contractor froze the case a month before trial even though the motion was eventually ruled to be frivolous, and the developer's lawyer said the delay cost his client millions.
"This is a perfect example where a shield has become an abusive sword," Republican State Rep. Jeff Leach said during a hearing on similar legislation to reform the TCPA in 2023.
Republican State Rep. Mano DeAyala, who is sponsoring HB 2988, told Fox News Digital on Monday that he brought the bill forward in an effort to keep the law from being abused by bad-faith actors who were "cluttering up" the courts with flimsy SLAPP motions.
"I love the TCPA," he said. "I think it's a wonderful, wonderful procedural step … But there's no disincentive for filing the motion because there's no consequence for a bad motion. So until you find the consequence for a bad motion, you're going to still see it abused. This was my effort in trying to fix this to stop the abuses."
DeAyala has accused critics of misrepresenting his bill's goals, responding to one on X that he's specifically trying to protect the TCPA.
"The TCPA as intended is alive and well and especially the scenario in your post," he wrote last week to someone saying his bill would kill the TCPA. "The bill does not change that. It simply provides some protection to the little guy from the bullies who misuse and abuse the TCPA."
Texas State Sen. Bryan Hughes, the sponsor of SB 336, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Advocates for the TCPA say the protections therein cut across the political spectrum; a liberal journalist or activist organization would benefit just as much as a conservative one from being able to speak out with less fear of reprisal. They also reject the notion that the reform bills being considered would clean up court overcrowding, saying it could have the reverse effect.
"They may not sue you to begin with," Prather told Fox News Digital, giving examples like restaurants suing patrons for bad online reviews. "It serves as a deterrent against those bullies that want to use the courtroom to silence you. It's a huge deterrent, and that's really important."
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

an hour ago
Johnson: Trump did 'exactly what he needed to do' in sending National Guard to LA
House Speaker Mike Johnson said he is 'not concerned at all' over President Donald Trump's order to send 2,000 National Guard troops to respond to immigration protests in Los Angeles. 'I think the president did exactly what he needed to do,' Johnson told ABC News' "This Week" co-anchor Jonathan Karl on Sunday. 'That is real leadership and he has the authority and the responsibility to do it,' the speaker said, defending Trump's decision. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth said he is prepared to mobilize Marines if the violence continues. Pressed if sending Marines into the streets of American cities is warranted, Johnson said, 'We have to be prepared to do what is necessary.'


Axios
an hour ago
- Axios
Trump shrugs off possible reconciliation with Musk
President Trump said he assumes his relationship with Elon Musk has ended and that he has no desire to repair it after the pair publicly fell out last week. "I think it's a shame that he's so depressed and so heartbroken," Trump said of the billionaire in a phone call with NBC News' Kristen Welker. The big picture: Trump's comments also came with a warning to Musk when the president said the Tesla CEO could face "serious consequences" should he fund Democratic candidates in the next election running against Republicans who vote for Trump's "big, beautiful bill." The billionaire, who contributed more than $290 million to Republicans in the 2024 election but has since said he'd cut back on political spending, posted last week that politicians "who betrayed the American people" should be fired in November. Trump declined to elaborate on what the consequences would be for Musk. House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) said in a Sunday interview on ABC's "This Week" that it would be a "big mistake" for Musk to go after Republicans who vote for the bill. Driving the news: Trump said he has no plans to speak to the Tesla CEO during the Saturday phone interview with Welker. Asked if he thought his relationship with Musk was over, Trump said he "would assume so." He accused the once-close administration ally of being "disrespectful to the office of the President." Catch up quick: The alliance between Trump and the former chainsaw-wielding face of DOGE exploded last week as Musk continuously campaigned against the massive tax-and-spending package, blasting it as a "disgusting abomination." Speaking to reporters during an Oval Office appearance alongside German Chancellor Friedrich Merz Thursday, Trump said he was "very disappointed" in Musk, who he claimed was very familiar with the inner workings of the legislation. While Trump talked, Musk fired back in real-time on X, claiming in one post that Trump would have lost the election without him. Zoom in: In one post that appears to have been deleted, Musk accused the president of being "in the Epstein files." Trump told NBC that it's "old news."
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
GOP downplays Trump-Musk feud's impact on midterms
Republicans are downplaying concerns that the feud between President Trump and Elon Musk will hamper the party's chances of defending their majorities in the House and the Senate next year. In the midst of the escalating war of words on Thursday, Musk claimed Trump would not have won the White House without him last year and floated the idea of launching a third party. Musk has also threatened to use his financial war chest and platform to challenge Republicans backing Trump's legislative agenda. However, many Republicans say Trump's influence within the party is strong enough to withstand any kind of political challenge from Musk. Others even say they still think Musk is a part of their team. 'I think if you're a Republican in a primary and you have Trump's support and Elon's opposition, you're going to be okay,' said Rep. Nick LaLota (R-N.Y.), adding that the president would eclipse Musk 'by a 10 or 100-fold.' Musk notably took credit for Trump's White House during his keyboard war with Trump on Thursday, claiming Democrats would control the House and hold a 51 to 49 majority in the Senate. The billionaire was the single largest donor in the 2024 general election, spending nearly $300 million. Musk's political action committee, America PAC, supported Trump and a number of Republicans running in key congressional races. The PAC has remained active during Trump's second administration, spending over $18 million in a closely watched race for a Wisconsin Supreme Court seat. The group has also promoted Trump's work this cycle, releasing its first television ad following Trump's joint address to Congress earlier this year. But despite the resources poured into Wisconsin, the Democratic-backed candidate won the court seat in what was described by critics as an embarrassment for Musk. America PAC spent millions in 18 competitive House races. Ten of the PAC's backed GOP House candidates won their elections, while the other 8 lost. 'America PAC spent $20 million on House races but none of that was super consequential— none of it was on TV, just digital and canvassing,' said one national Republican operative, who noted Musk was still on the GOP 'team.' Speaker Mike Johnson called Musk 'a big contributor in the last election' in an interview on CNBC's 'Squawk Box' on Friday, but said it was ultimately 'a whole team effort.' 'I mean, President Trump is the most consequential political figure of his generation, of modern American history. He is the one responsible for that,' Johnson said. 'But we all worked hard. We delivered the House majority. I traveled the country nonstop. I did over 360 campaign events in 250 cities and 40 states, and I logged enough miles last year to circle the globe five and a half times. I mean, I contributed to it as well. All of our House Republicans did.' Democrats have spent much of the first half of this year making Musk a boogeyman of sorts, painting him as out of touch with most Americans. The feud between Trump and Musk does not appear to be changing that strategy going into the midterms. 'Democrats are going to win by highlighting the fact that Republicans are failing at lowering costs because they are too busy pushing tax breaks for the ultra-wealthy and big corporations, while making the rest of us pay for them,' said Viet Shelton, a spokesperson for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. 'Elon is, and forever will be, an instantly-recognizable manifestation of the fact that House Republicans don't work for the American people, they work for the billionaires.' Some Republicans remain weary of Musk, noting his massive online following that is made up of over 220 million followers on his platform X. Musk's views on the debt are widely shared by fiscally conservative voters. 'If Musk makes the national debt and deficit his defining issue and starts backing candidates who share that focus, it could create a real fracture inside the GOP. Trump's economic agenda has never been about fiscal restraint,' said a former White House communications aide who worked in the first Trump administration. 'If Musk begins channeling serious money into candidates who want to draw a hard line on spending and debt, you could see a Freedom Caucus 2.0 emerge — this time with financial firepower and a mandate to push back on Trump and Speaker Johnson's spending ambitions,' the aide said. But Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.), a member of the House Freedom Caucus, threw cold water on the notion that the feud could jeopardize Republicans in the midterms. 'No, I don't think so. Now everybody's got to decide that. We all have one vote and we'll see,' Norman told The Hill. 'But I hope he keeps doing what he's doing and the team of people he put together, I want to do it statewide. Each state, I would do just what he's done with the federal government,' he added, referring to Musk's leadership at the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). DOGE Subcommittee Chair Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) noted the importance of all of Trump's 2024 donors and supporters, including Musk, but suggested the two take their feud offline. 'I think every single American that voted for us deserves credit and Elon Musk is one vote,' Greene told reporters. 'I've said that every single vote and every single donor matters whether they've donated a dollar or hundreds of millions of dollars.' 'I don't think lashing out on the internet is the way to handle any kind of disagreement, especially when you have each other's cell phones,' she said. –Alex Gangitano and Emily Brooks contributed. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.