As many of you know, “SLAPPs” have been around for decades – “Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation,” typically used to target activists who speak out against corporate wrongdoing, in recent months and years have been increasingly focused on the media – even mainstream media.

A notable example is X Corp (formerly Twitter) v. Media Matters, a lawsuit filed in November 2023. In this suit, Musk is going to town on the press, ostensibly with the goal of increasing his control over the media. After buying Twitter he is now bullying journalists in order to try to control the flow of information to the masses.

This lawsuit is getting barely any coverage, which is unfortunate, given the dangers of SLAPPs and other “lawfare” abuses. In a typical SLAPP, the plaintiff does not expect to win but rather to make the defendant – and others – stop criticizing the plaintiff corporation/organization and its colleagues, due to fear, legal costs, mounting time commitments, and exhaustion.

X Corporation alleges claims for interference with contract and business disparagement. The specific accusation (which Media Matters vigorously denies) is:

Defendant Media Matters for America (“Media Matters”) is a self-proclaimed media watchdog that decided it would not let the truth get in the way of a story it wanted to publish about X Corp. Looking to portray X’s social networking platform as being dominated by “white nationalist and anti-Semitic conspiracy theories,” Media Matters knowingly and maliciously manufactured side-by-side images depicting advertisers’ posts on X Corp.’s social media platform beside Neo-Nazi and white-nationalist fringe content and then portrayed these manufactured images as if they were what typical X users experience on the platform. Media Matters designed both these images and its resulting media strategy to drive advertisers from the platform and destroy X Corp. (X v. Media Matters)

The amount of resources poured into the X v. Media Matters lawsuit is astounding. A total of 20 attorneys are currently filed into the case (9 for X and 11 for Media Matters). The case has dragged on for a year and a half, with numerous motions to dismiss and compel document production flying back and forth, totaling 170 court filings (more than 4,000 pages) to date, and an “interlocutory appeal” (an appeal on a trial court’s decision while other aspects of the case are still proceeding). In addition, X has filed a motion for attorney fees after defeating Media Matters’ motion to dismiss. Normally, such scorched earth litigation tactics might discourage and defeat a media outlet or nonprofit organization.

But Media Matters is fighting back…big time. They are represented by the huge law firm Gibson Dunn (ironic, given their representation of Energy Transfer Partners against Greenpeace and leading similar corporate litigation against protest activities). Whether Gibson Dunn is defending Media Matters pro bono or as an insurance defense arrangement, the healthy punching back is heartening in this case.

Looking forward, we can certainly expect SLAPP suits to exponentially increase in an authoritarian regime, along with the trend towards criminalizing protest, as well as such tactics as doxing (broadcasting personally identifiable information about an individual or organization). For example, the Tesla Takedown campaign has been targeted for doxing—with people retweeting fascist propaganda, inviting them to dox protesters and organizers. This has a cumulative impact on activists, creating a ripple of fear and paranoia that risks chilling many who would otherwise speak out (which is completely legal, Constitutionally-protected action, despite what the authoritarian fascists and their followers have to say). When corporations and fascists fight with lawfare, CLDC’s attorneys and others will help find ways to fight back.

How You Can Protect Yourself

• Know Your Jurisdiction’s Protections:
  The patchwork of state anti-SLAPP laws creates vastly different legal landscapes across the country. In states with robust anti-SLAPP statutes, such as California, defendants can file a special motion to strike early in the proceedings, potentially recovering attorney fees when successful. However, in states with weaker protections, defendants must rely on alternative legal strategies.
• Build Your Support Network:
  No one should face a SLAPP suit alone—or ever. CLDC provides resources and legal guidance (and potentially legal representation) for SLAPP targets. If you have been the target of a SLAPP suit, connect with others who have faced similar challenges in order to be better prepared both legally and emotionally for the battle ahead.
• Remember the Bigger Picture:
  Standing firm against SLAPP suits doesn’t just protect individual defendants—it safeguards the broader ecosystem of movements…and our right to free expression. When targets refuse to be silenced by legal intimidation, they help establish precedents that make these tactics less effective for future potential SLAPPers. Successful anti-SLAPP defenses often lead to stronger protections for all speakers in that jurisdiction.
• Check Out CLDC’s Resource Library:
  Haven’t seen our new Resource Library?! Now’s your chance! Visit our revamped, easy to use database with dozens of legal activist resources. Let us know what you think of the upgrade, and what other kind of information you’d like to see in there.

Remember, when journalists and activists find themselves targeted by a SLAPP lawsuit, the initial reaction is often panic. This is precisely what SLAPP filers count on. The power of these lawsuits lies in intimidation, but with proper preparation and support, targets can effectively counter these legal bullying tactics. These battles are never easy, but they are winnable with the right preparation, support, and legal strategy. As always, CLDC has your back—until all are free.