My Photo
Blog powered by Typepad


Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

« RLUIPA Suits Cannot Be Brought Against Individual Defendants | Main | City May Violate ADA by Allowing Vendor to Block Sidewalk Curb Ramp »



Because of the split in authority, the California Supreme Court has granted review of the court's rejection of the effort of government agents to assert the anti-SLAPP statute. It may well be revisiting its holding in Vargas v. City of Salinas, that government actors are protected by the state’s anti-SLAPP statute. The Vasquez court was right in rejecting the government officials‘ use of Sec. 425.16, but the court’s reasoning that voting by government officials should not be protected by the anti-SLAPP statute because it is not First Amendment activity did go far enough. No government conduct is First Amendment activity and no government activity warrants anti-SLAPP protections. Here is a link to a recent law review article detailing the developing split of authority and dissecting the problem with government use of anti-SLAPP statutes, in particular California’s ( Anti-SLAPP Confabulation and the Government Speech Doctrine ) :

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)