If you’ve ever hesitated before posting a review, signing a petition, speaking at a school board meeting, or calling out a powerful person online, you already understand the basic goal behind a SLAPP lawsuit.

SLAPP stands for strategic lawsuit against public participation. These lawsuits weaponize the legal system against free speech. People file these cases to punish and intimidate critics, not to win on the merits. The point often sounds simple: Make speaking up feel too expensive, too stressful, and too risky.

Journalists, activists, neighborhood leaders, researchers, whistleblowers, and everyday residents can all end up in the crosshairs of a SLAPP lawsuit. Even if the defendant ultimately wins, a SLAPP can still drain time, money, and energy along the way.

What Is a SLAPP?

A SLAPP lawsuit uses the court system as a pressure tactic. A plaintiff claims defamation, interference with business, conspiracy, or another civil wrong, and then demands damages that can look scary on paper.

A SLAPP differs from an ordinary dispute in one significant way: The plaintiff’s leverage comes from the process itself. The plaintiff’s goal rarely involves winning a verdict. Instead, the objective is intimidation. The filer wants to bury the defendant in legal fees, force them to retract their statements, and discourage others from speaking up.

Even a weak case can force a defendant to:

• Hire a lawyer
• Answer legal filings on strict deadlines
• Sit for depositions
• Hand over documents and private messages
• Spend months or years under legal stress

SLAPPs often target speech and petition rights protected by the First Amendment, including speaking to the public and urging government action. 

How SLAPP Lawsuits Work

SLAPPs follow a predictable playbook. Plaintiffs change the details, but the strategy stays the same:

• First, a reporter, community leader, journalist, etc., speaks up on a public issue.
  That speech may involve reporting misconduct, opposing a property development, investigating a business deal, or amplifying a public meeting.
• Next, the plaintiff files claims that sound serious.
  Common claims include defamation, business interference, breach of data protection law, and breach of contract arising from a nondisclosure agreement or settlement.
• Then, the lawsuit creates cost and fear.
  Legal fees rise fast. Defendants may also face reputational attacks, online harassment, or pressure to delete content and stop speaking.
• Finally, the plaintiff seeks silence or a settlement.
  Many defendants settle to end the stress and expense, not because they lied. That result chills speech far beyond the case itself.

Fortunately, media outlets can protect themselves from lawsuits.

During a recent Editor & Publisher webinar, Reporters Shield explained how it gives journalists and newsrooms direct access to expert legal advice to help them prevent, respond to, and defend against legal threats. When you join, you also become part of a global community of journalists who stand together against intimidation and abuse of the legal system.

The evidence is clear: legal attacks on the press are increasing. If you haven’t faced one yet, it’s not a question of if — it’s a question of when.

SLAPPs don’t just target individuals.

They warn entire communities to stay quiet.

Why SLAPP Lawsuits Are Dangerous

These lawsuits attack free speech by punishing people for speaking on public issues. When journalists or investigators face crushing legal costs for telling the truth, others pull back from accountability reporting.

The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression warns that SLAPPs threaten the First Amendment by turning the legal system into a censorship tool that favors the wealthy.

Fighting Back: Anti-SLAPP Laws in the US

State legislatures across the US have recognized the threat and enacted anti-SLAPP statutes to protect defendants.

What Anti-SLAPP Laws Do

Anti-SLAPP laws give defendants a way to end a SLAPP early. Most strong anti-SLAPP statutes include a few core tools:

• An early motion to dismiss when speech involves a public issue
  
• A pause on expensive discovery while the court decides the motion
  
• Fee-shifting, meaning the SLAPP filer may have to pay the defendant’s legal fees if the defendant wins

Civil liberties groups describe anti-SLAPP statutes as a way to terminate meritless cases that threaten First Amendment rights quickly and to recover attorneys’ fees and costs. 

Do All States Have Anti-SLAPP Protections?

No, and the patchwork creates problems.

As of June 2025, the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press reported that 38 states and the District of Columbia had anti-SLAPP laws.

After that, more states moved. The Institute for Free Speech reported that Michigan became the 39th state to adopt an anti-SLAPP law in December 2025. 

Reforms also continue through the Uniform Public Expression Protection Act (UPEPA), a model law adopted by several states. 

Even with that progress, state laws vary widely. Some offer broad protection. Others cover only narrow scenarios, which allows plaintiffs to seek friendlier courts. 

Why the Lack of a Federal Anti-SLAPP Law Matters

Plaintiffs can forum shop, meaning they can select jurisdictions with weaker protections and then compel defendants to engage in protracted, expensive litigation.

Advocacy groups and press freedom organizations have warned that SLAPP filers use the lack of uniform protections to their advantage.

SLAPPs Aren’t Just a US Problem

SLAPP tactics show up worldwide, especially against investigative reporters and anti-corruption advocates.

A European coalition’s reporting found 166 SLAPP cases filed across Europe in 2023. 

How to Spot a Potential SLAPP

You can’t label a lawsuit a SLAPP based on a gut feeling alone, but many SLAPP suits tend to share common warning signs:

• The plaintiff seeks substantial damages for routine criticism.
• The complaint targets speech about a public issue, public meeting, or government action.
• The claims rely on vague accusations (“malicious,” “conspired,” “ruined our business”).
• The plaintiff focuses on punishment, not correction.
• The plaintiff first threatens you with a legal letter intended to intimidate you into keeping quiet.

If you see those signals, you may face a case built to intimidate.

What to Do if Someone Tries to Use a SLAPP to Silence You

• Don’t ignore it: Deadlines matter. Courts don’t pause because you feel shocked, overwhelmed, or busy.
• Save everything: Keep posts, emails, DMs, screenshots, and timestamps. Don’t clean up your accounts in a panic.
• Ask about anti-SLAPP options early: Anti-SLAPP protections often involve strict timing rules. If you’re facing a potential SLAPP lawsuit, you need an attorney who understands both defamation law and anti-SLAPP statutes. These cases move quickly, and a lawyer with specific experience in SLAPP defense can act fast to file the right motions, protect your rights, and push for dismissal before legal costs spiral.

Consider Getting Help From Organizations Defending the Press

Some nonprofits, such as Reporters Shield, legal clinics, and press groups, offer resources, referrals, or amicus support in appropriate cases. Start with reputable organizations focused on speech and press freedom.

SLAPP lawsuits don’t need strong facts to cause damage.

They just need enough legal friction to make speaking up

feel like a personal financial crisis.

Fighting Back Against SLAPPs with Reporters Shield 

If someone threatens you with a lawsuit over your speech on a public issue, take it seriously, document everything, and get legal guidance quickly.

Communities work better when people can criticize, report, organize, and petition without fear. Anti-SLAPP laws help, but the patchwork still leaves gaps, and SLAPP filers know how to exploit them. 

Reporters Shield is fighting back. Covering legal costs, providing rapid support, and building global solidarity help ensure that journalists can continue to expose corruption, abuse, and injustice without the overwhelming financial burden.

If you’re a journalist, ask your newsroom to become a member and protect your right to expose the truth. 

When powerful actors weaponize legal threats against the press, the public must support journalists and safeguard the right to know.You can support our work with a contribution that helps protect reporters from legal threats aimed at silencing the truth.