Democrats in the Wisconsin State Legislature recently announced a bill that would have helped any member of the public avoid the punishing legal fees from a strategic lawsuit against public participation, or SLAPP, case.
A Badger Project article about the bill appeared in the Nov. 21 issue of the Oconto Falls County Times-Herald. According to the article:
SLAPP suits stifle journalists and news organizations through what are often costly and baseless lawsuits, according to the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press. They’re brought in “bad faith,” says the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign.
Democratic state Reps. Christian Phelps of Eau Claire, Deb Andraca of Whitefish Bay and Alex Joers of Waunakee announced another attempt to oust back against SLAPP suits in a memo they circulated to every member of the state Legislature in late August. The bill, if it were to pass, would offer protections to anyone who exercises their free speech rights, including community organizers, protesters and journalists.
More than 60% of the U.S. population lives in a state that provides “good” protection from SLAPP cases, according to a 2025 report from the Institute for Free Speech, a Washington-based non-profit dedicated to the First Amendment.
If you live in Wisconsin, you’re not among that protected majority. Thirty-eight states and Washington have “a functioning anti-SLAPP statute,” reads the report, which ranked states from A to F based on the strength of their anti-SLAPP protections. Wisconsin is among 12 states, including Michigan, that do not provide any anti-SLAPP protections. Minnesota and Iowa have A ratings.
The bill proposed by Democrats this session would give defendants the ability to make a special motion to strike a SLAPP case if the defendant was acting “in furtherance of his or her right of petition or free speech” in connection “with a public issue,” ac- cording to the nonpartisan Legislative Reference Bureau, which offers analysis of bills to legislators and the public. Defendants could also recoup legal fees if their motion to strike succeeded.
The anti-SLAPP proposal received a bill number and was assigned to a committee Sept. 15. It has yet to attract Republican support.
