9 ms·

IANAL so correct me if I’m wrong but it looks like Musk has a decent chance of getting SLAPPed back [1] to kingdom come. Twitter may be a private entity but th

IANAL so correct me if I’m wrong but it looks like Musk has a decent chance of getting SLAPPed back [1] to kingdom come. Twitter may be a private entity but the lawsuit is clearly meant to stifle the distribution of public information. Now that he owns one of the largest social media platforms used to distribute stuff like CALFire emergency announcements, that jet information is not only already public but arguably that information is now in the public interest [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_lawsuit_against_public_participation https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_lawsuit_against_pu...

ncallaway 4y ago
It would depend on where the lawsuit is filed. Anti-SLAPP statutes are state laws, and vary wildly by state from very strong laws, weak laws with almost no teeth, to no laws at all. Unfortunately this means enterprising billionaires might be able to forum shop the SLAPP lawsuit to states where it’s less likely to bite them later.
- akiselev 4y ago
  Sweeney is a college student in Florida and the alleged incident happened in California. I’m guessing Musk is based out of Texas? CA > TX > FL according to anti-slapp.org grades but all three have anti-SLAPP laws. Sweeney might actually have the hardest time in his state because the laws are weirdly specific. IANAL and genuinely curious, how much further can Musk shop around? To the state Sweeney’s corp is in (if he has one)? Does some random court in Kansas or whatever have the jurisdiction to slap a meaningful injunction against someone who’s never stepped in the state? I doubt Musk would be able to actually recover any funds that way but again IANAL and I’m curious. Can he make this federal? Musk is literally trying to sue a twenty year old college student. Might as well try bleeding a rock. Is Musk so out of touch that he really thinks that he can get anything but a pyrrhic victory?
  - wpietri 4y ago
    What Musk would get is more of what he's already getting: causing pain to the target and fear to others. Whether or not he eventually loses the lawsuit doesn't matter for that.
    - akiselev 4y ago
      That’s why we have Anti-SLAPP statutes… laws to fight ”strategic lawsuits against public participation”: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_lawsuit_against_public_participation https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_lawsuit_against_pu... Again, I’m asking about the jurisdiction which decides whether Sweeney will have anti-slapp to defend him. If so, Musk’s case can get dismissed with prejudice at the first hearing and the courts in some states will even fine him for wasting everyone’s time.
      - wpietri 4y ago
        Yes, thanks, I'm aware, and I'm saying that an anti-SLAPP statue is insufficient here. Might the process be shorter? Yes. Might Musk have to pay attorney's fees? Yes. Is that enough to render Musk's threats harmless? No. Is it enough to dissuade Musk? Also no. Getting sued by Musk will hopefully be a less giant pain in the ass than without an anti-SLAPP statue. But it still could be quite painful. And just the threat of the lawsuit is pain on its own and may have a chilling effect on both the target and others.
        akiselev 4y ago
        I looked up some case studies (for California): https://www.gibsondunn.com/recent-developments-in-california-anti-slapp-case-law-summer-2021/ https://www.gibsondunn.com/recent-developments-in-california... Yeah, ouch. I had thought the legal process could be terminated sooner but the defendant in the first case study Hill v. Heslep et al still had over $100k in legal fees (which they were awarded after winning the anti-SLAPP motion), though that seems to have had a complicated second prong due to California’s new revenge porn laws. I hope Sweeney opens up a legal defense fund and Streisands Musk to victory.
bjourne 4y ago
State courts have ruled anti-SLAPP laws unconstitutional. They likely can't protect Sweeney at all.
- Eisenstein 4y ago
  A statement like that without specifics is counter-productive to a discussion. Please provide them.
  - bjourne 4y ago
    First google hit: https://www.rcfp.org/introduction-anti-slapp-guide/ https://www.rcfp.org/introduction-anti-slapp-guide/
    - Eisenstein 4y ago
      Requiring people to search for and parse information to figure out what you meant is not a very effective way to communicate. Let me be more specific: What does your comment mean, with regards to the context it is in? What specific things make what you are contending true?
      - bjourne 4y ago
        Eisenstein 4y ago
        I'm not the one making assertions about legal actions. You can't call someone lazy for not making your arguments for you. I assume you are doing this because you wrote what you did based on information that you cannot back up and are now deflecting.
- jamincan 4y ago
  Since you can't be bothered to post the relevant part yourself, I'll do it for you: "Courts struck down anti-SLAPP laws in Washington and Minnesota, and Washington enacted an updated law Courts in Washington and Minnesota struck down their states’ anti-SLAPP laws, finding them unconstitutional under their respective state constitutions. As discussed above, however, Washington enacted an updated anti-SLAPP law in 2021 that addressed the concerns of the state supreme court. In 2016, a Minnesota appellate court similarly found that state’s anti-SLAPP law unconstitutional, finding that the law “deprive[s] the non-moving party of the right to a jury trial by requiring a court to make pretrial factual findings to determine whether the moving party is immune from liability.” Mobile Diagnostic Imaging v. Hooten, 889 N.W.2d 27, 35 (Minn. Ct. App. 2016). The following year, the Minnesota Supreme Court agreed, finding that state’s anti-SLAPP law unconstitutional as applied to claims alleging torts because it requires a district court to make pretrial factual finding in violation of the plaintiff’s right to a trial by jury under the Minnesota constitution. Leiendecker v. Asian Women United of Minn., 895 N.W.2d 623, 637–38 (Minn. 2017). These decisions raise concerns that courts in other states that recognize a plaintiff’s right to a trial by jury may follow suit." From that, I don't know that it's reasonable to conclude that "they likely can't protect Sweeney at all", but IANAL.

ncallaway 4y ago

It would depend on where the lawsuit is filed. Anti-SLAPP statutes are state laws, and vary wildly by state from very strong laws, weak laws with almost no teeth, to no laws at all. Unfortunately this means enterprising billionaires might be able to forum shop the SLAPP lawsuit to states where it’s less likely to bite them later.

akiselev 4y ago
Sweeney is a college student in Florida and the alleged incident happened in California. I’m guessing Musk is based out of Texas? CA > TX > FL according to anti-slapp.org grades but all three have anti-SLAPP laws. Sweeney might actually have the hardest time in his state because the laws are weirdly specific. IANAL and genuinely curious, how much further can Musk shop around? To the state Sweeney’s corp is in (if he has one)? Does some random court in Kansas or whatever have the jurisdiction to slap a meaningful injunction against someone who’s never stepped in the state? I doubt Musk would be able to actually recover any funds that way but again IANAL and I’m curious. Can he make this federal? Musk is literally trying to sue a twenty year old college student. Might as well try bleeding a rock. Is Musk so out of touch that he really thinks that he can get anything but a pyrrhic victory?
- wpietri 4y ago
  What Musk would get is more of what he's already getting: causing pain to the target and fear to others. Whether or not he eventually loses the lawsuit doesn't matter for that.
  - akiselev 4y ago
    That’s why we have Anti-SLAPP statutes… laws to fight ”strategic lawsuits against public participation”: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_lawsuit_against_public_participation https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_lawsuit_against_pu... Again, I’m asking about the jurisdiction which decides whether Sweeney will have anti-slapp to defend him. If so, Musk’s case can get dismissed with prejudice at the first hearing and the courts in some states will even fine him for wasting everyone’s time.
    - wpietri 4y ago
      Yes, thanks, I'm aware, and I'm saying that an anti-SLAPP statue is insufficient here. Might the process be shorter? Yes. Might Musk have to pay attorney's fees? Yes. Is that enough to render Musk's threats harmless? No. Is it enough to dissuade Musk? Also no. Getting sued by Musk will hopefully be a less giant pain in the ass than without an anti-SLAPP statue. But it still could be quite painful. And just the threat of the lawsuit is pain on its own and may have a chilling effect on both the target and others.
      - akiselev 4y ago
        I looked up some case studies (for California): https://www.gibsondunn.com/recent-developments-in-california-anti-slapp-case-law-summer-2021/ https://www.gibsondunn.com/recent-developments-in-california... Yeah, ouch. I had thought the legal process could be terminated sooner but the defendant in the first case study Hill v. Heslep et al still had over $100k in legal fees (which they were awarded after winning the anti-SLAPP motion), though that seems to have had a complicated second prong due to California’s new revenge porn laws. I hope Sweeney opens up a legal defense fund and Streisands Musk to victory.

bjourne 4y ago

State courts have ruled anti-SLAPP laws unconstitutional. They likely can't protect Sweeney at all.

Eisenstein 4y ago
A statement like that without specifics is counter-productive to a discussion. Please provide them.
- bjourne 4y ago
  First google hit: https://www.rcfp.org/introduction-anti-slapp-guide/ https://www.rcfp.org/introduction-anti-slapp-guide/
  - Eisenstein 4y ago
    Requiring people to search for and parse information to figure out what you meant is not a very effective way to communicate. Let me be more specific: What does your comment mean, with regards to the context it is in? What specific things make what you are contending true?
    - bjourne 4y ago
      - Eisenstein 4y ago
        I'm not the one making assertions about legal actions. You can't call someone lazy for not making your arguments for you. I assume you are doing this because you wrote what you did based on information that you cannot back up and are now deflecting.
jamincan 4y ago
Since you can't be bothered to post the relevant part yourself, I'll do it for you: "Courts struck down anti-SLAPP laws in Washington and Minnesota, and Washington enacted an updated law Courts in Washington and Minnesota struck down their states’ anti-SLAPP laws, finding them unconstitutional under their respective state constitutions. As discussed above, however, Washington enacted an updated anti-SLAPP law in 2021 that addressed the concerns of the state supreme court. In 2016, a Minnesota appellate court similarly found that state’s anti-SLAPP law unconstitutional, finding that the law “deprive[s] the non-moving party of the right to a jury trial by requiring a court to make pretrial factual findings to determine whether the moving party is immune from liability.” Mobile Diagnostic Imaging v. Hooten, 889 N.W.2d 27, 35 (Minn. Ct. App. 2016). The following year, the Minnesota Supreme Court agreed, finding that state’s anti-SLAPP law unconstitutional as applied to claims alleging torts because it requires a district court to make pretrial factual finding in violation of the plaintiff’s right to a trial by jury under the Minnesota constitution. Leiendecker v. Asian Women United of Minn., 895 N.W.2d 623, 637–38 (Minn. 2017). These decisions raise concerns that courts in other states that recognize a plaintiff’s right to a trial by jury may follow suit." From that, I don't know that it's reasonable to conclude that "they likely can't protect Sweeney at all", but IANAL.