{"id":9217,"date":"2019-06-28T09:44:39","date_gmt":"2019-06-28T16:44:39","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/cldc.org\/?page_id=9217"},"modified":"2026-07-15T14:57:59","modified_gmt":"2026-07-15T21:57:59","slug":"anti-slapp","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/cldc.org\/fr\/anti-slapp\/","title":{"rendered":"D\u00e9fense des militants dans les SLAPP et autres guerres juridiques"},"content":{"rendered":"

D\u00e9fense des militants dans les SLAPP et autres guerres juridiques<\/h1><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>

Un proc\u00e8s SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) est une proc\u00e9dure judiciaire intent\u00e9e dans le but de faire taire ou d'intimider les opposants en les submergeant de co\u00fbts et de complications juridiques, plut\u00f4t qu'en cherchant un recours juridique l\u00e9gitime.<\/h3>\n

Les avocats du CLDC ont d\u00e9fendu avec succ\u00e8s des militants et des organisations pour la justice sociale et climatique contre des RIPC (recours strat\u00e9giques contre la participation publique), qui visent \u00e0 museler la libert\u00e9 d'expression, notamment la dissidence. Les entreprises d\u00e9raisonnablement riches ont un historique long et honteux de d\u00e9p\u00f4t de proc\u00e8s RIPC pour intimider les militants et les organisations pour la justice climatique et d'autres mouvements progressistes. Et elles continuent de les d\u00e9poser, dans le seul but de drainer les ressources des militants, de gaspiller leur temps (ce qui affecte l'effort que les gens peuvent consacrer aux mouvements sociaux) et de causer de l'anxi\u00e9t\u00e9. Tous ces facteurs cr\u00e9ent un effet dissuasif qui nuit \u00e0 l'exercice de la libert\u00e9 d'expression. Les exemples incluent les poursuites en diffamation (calomnie et injures) contre des personnes simplement pour s'\u00eatre exprim\u00e9es contre les m\u00e9faits des entreprises. Les proc\u00e8s RIPC accusent g\u00e9n\u00e9ralement le militant ou l'organisation d\u00e9fendeur de diffamation ou d'une autre forme de faute d\u00e9lictuelle, pr\u00e9sentant le proc\u00e8s comme l\u00e9gitime alors que l'objectif r\u00e9el est d'intimider et de faire taire les militants et de cibler le droit \u00e0 la libert\u00e9 d'expression. Le CLDC est un expert national dans la d\u00e9fense des militants et de leurs campagnes contre la menace des proc\u00e8s RIPC anticonstitutionnels. Nous disposons d'une vaste banque de m\u00e9moires et de ressources juridiques \u00e0 la disposition des avocats. Si vous \u00eates un avocat repr\u00e9sentant des militants pour le changement environnemental ou social, veuillez Contactez-nous.<\/a> Nous sommes un membre fier et actif du national La Coalition Prot\u00e9ger la Manifestation<\/a>, qui d\u00e9fend ceux qui sont attaqu\u00e9s par des poursuites-b\u00e2illons et \u00e9duque les militants et le public \u00e0 leur sujet. Par ce processus, nous avons fait comprendre, en tant que coalition, que nous nous tenons les uns les autres, et que les brutes corporatives s'en prennent \u00e0 nous tous lorsqu'elles s'en prennent \u00e0 l'un de nous. Les avocats du CLDC ont fait rejeter les poursuites-b\u00e2illons de Resolute Forest Products et d'Energy Transfer Partners (maintenant connu sous le nom d'Energy Transfer) contre des militants pour la justice climatique pour nos clients. Nous avons \u00e9galement vaincu le \u2019Nazi de la weed\u2019 d'Eugene, qui a tent\u00e9 de faire taire un militant antifasciste d'Eugene lorsqu'elle a \u00e9t\u00e9 d\u00e9masqu\u00e9e comme nationaliste blanche. Nous sommes impatients de remporter d'autres victoires contre les poursuites-b\u00e2illons malveillantes !<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>

\"Weed 9\" Lawsuit: Water for Citizens of Weed California et al. v. Churchwell White LLP et al.<\/h5>

CLDC lawyers provided legal support for the \u201cWeed 9,\u201d and Water for Citizens of Weed, California (WCWC), nine members of the Weed community who faced a SLAPP suit brought by Roseburg Forest Products in their effort to control a local water source. That SLAPP suit against our clients was dismissed, and our clients were awarded attorney fees under California's SLAPP statute. Roseburg Forest Products' lawsuit came in response to the nine citizen activists voicing their concerns about their small city losing access to a vital public spring water source to the interests of the private logging company. RFP's attorneys asserted that they were just trying to resolve legal ownership issues regarding the water supply, but neither WCWC nor the nine people RFP's attorneys named in the suit had ever made any personal claim to the rights or title to the water supply \u2014 a fact the law firm admitted at the time. Yet even with that knowledge, the law firm appealed the court rulings and dragged the defendants through two more years of legal proceedings. Several of the nine activists are former mayors \u2014 some who are now in their 80s and 90s. The activists had participated in town meetings and taken other grassroots actions as members of WCWC, to educate their community about the threat to their water supply. After writing a letter requesting assistance from a state agency, and speaking out during a local meeting, they found themselves in court being sued by a $900 million timber company. California's SLAPP statute also includes what is known as a \"SLAPPback\" provision, allowing people who have been hit with a SLAPP suit to turn around and sue the \"SLAPPer,\" for emotional distress damages and other remedies that go beyond an attorney fee award for having to defend the initial SLAPP suit. In April 2020 CLDC filed a SLAPPback suit against the Sacramento law firm Churchwell White LLP and two of its attorneys, alleging that they engaged in malicious and unlawful conduct when they (on behalf of their client, Roseburg Forest Products) filed the lawsuit against the Weed 9 and WCWC. We recently submitted our final brief on appeal in the \"SLAPPback\" lawsuit, and hope to have oral argument soon.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"","protected":false},"author":93,"featured_media":0,"parent":7992,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"page-category":[716],"class_list":["post-9217","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry","page-category-divi"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/cldc.org\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/9217","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/cldc.org\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/cldc.org\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cldc.org\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/93"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cldc.org\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=9217"}],"version-history":[{"count":8,"href":"https:\/\/cldc.org\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/9217\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":18678,"href":"https:\/\/cldc.org\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/9217\/revisions\/18678"}],"up":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cldc.org\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/7992"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/cldc.org\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=9217"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"page-category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cldc.org\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/page-category?post=9217"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}