ILLINOIS CITIZEN PARTICIPATION ACT OF 2007


It has been brought to our attention that a sitting city council person has attempted to silence this website.  Here is the text of the email that was forwarded to us:

"Libel and slander is a high bar against any elected official but I will not stand by while you defame anyone. I have not only sent this to my attorney but to the Illinois State Board of Elections as well.

Regards,

Councilman xxxxxxx"


Notice the use of the terms "libel" and "slander", then read below.  Apparently, we have struck a nerve with the current administration.
Out of courtesy to this prominent man's family, we are withholding his name.


Strategic lawsuit against public participation

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A strategic lawsuit against public participation (SLAPP) is a lawsuit that is intended to censor, intimidate, and silence critics by burdening them with the cost of a legal defense until they abandon their criticism or opposition.[1]

The typical SLAPP plaintiff does not normally expect to win the lawsuit. The plaintiff's goals are accomplished if the defendant succumbs to fear, intimidation, mounting legal costs or simple exhaustion and abandons the criticism. A SLAPP may also intimidate others from participating in the debate. A SLAPP is often preceded by a legal threat. The difficulty is that plaintiffs do not present themselves to the Court admitting that their intent is to censor, intimidate or silence their critics. Hence, the difficulty in drafting SLAPP legislation, and in applying it, is to craft an approach which affords an early termination to invalid abusive suits, without denying a legitimate day in court to valid good faith claims.

SLAPPs take various forms but the most common is a civil suit for defamation, which in the English common law tradition is a tort. The common law of libel dates to the early 17th century and (unusual in English law) is reverse onus, meaning, once someone alleges a statement is libelous, the burden is on the defendant to prove that it is not. Various abusive uses of this law including political libel (criticism of the political actions or views of others) have ceased to exist in most places, but persist in some jurisdictions (notably British Columbia and Ontario) where political views can be held as defamatory. A common feature of SLAPP suits is forum shopping, wherein plaintiffs find courts that are more favourable towards the claims to be brought than the court in which the defendant (or sometimes plaintiffs) live.

Other widely mentioned elements of a SLAPP are the actual effectiveness at silencing critics, the timing of the suit, inclusion of extra or spurious defendants (such as relatives or hosts of legitimate defendants), inclusion of plaintiffs with no real claim (such as corporations that are affiliated with legitimate plaintiffs), making claims that are very difficult to disprove or rely on no written record, ambiguous or deliberately mangled wording that lets plaintiffs make spurious allegations without fear of perjury, refusal to consider any settlement (or none other than cash), characterization of all offers to settle as insincere, extensive and unnecessary demands for discovery, attempts to identify anonymous or pseudonymous critics, appeals on minor points of law, demands for broad rulings when appeal is accepted on such minor points of law, and attempts to run up defendants' costs even if this clearly costs more to the plaintiffs.

THE STATE OF ILLINOIS "ANTI-SLAPP" LAW.

CIVIL PROCEDURE
(735 ILCS 110/) Citizen Participation Act.

(735 ILCS 110/1)
Sec. 1. Short title. This Act may be cited as the Citizen Participation Act.
(Source: P.A. 95-506, eff. 8-28-07.)


(735 ILCS 110/5)
Sec. 5. Public policy. Pursuant to the fundamental philosophy of the American constitutional form of government, it is declared to be the public policy of the State of Illinois that the constitutional rights of citizens and organizations to be involved and participate freely in the process of government must be encouraged and safeguarded with great diligence. The information, reports, opinions, claims, arguments, and other expressions provided by citizens are vital to effective law enforcement, the operation of government, the making of public policy and decisions, and the continuation of representative democracy. The laws, courts, and other agencies of this State must provide the utmost protection for the free exercise of these rights of petition, speech, association, and government participation.
Civil actions for money damages have been filed against citizens and organizations of this State as a result of their valid exercise of their constitutional rights to petition, speak freely, associate freely, and otherwise participate in and communicate with government. There has been a disturbing increase in lawsuits termed "Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation" in government or "SLAPPs" as they are popularly called.
The threat of SLAPPs significantly chills and diminishes citizen participation in government, voluntary public service, and the exercise of these important constitutional rights. This abuse of the judicial process can and has been used as a means of intimidating, harassing, or punishing citizens and organizations for involving themselves in public affairs.
It is in the public interest and it is the purpose of this Act to strike a balance between the rights of persons to file lawsuits for injury and the constitutional rights of persons to petition, speak freely, associate freely, and otherwise participate in government; to protect and encourage public participation in government to the maximum extent permitted by law; to establish an efficient process for identification and adjudication of SLAPPs; and to provide for attorney's fees and costs to prevailing movants.
(Source: P.A. 95-506, eff. 8-28-07.)


(735 ILCS 110/10)
Sec. 10. Definitions. In this Act:
"Government" includes a branch, department, agency, instrumentality, official, employee, agent, or other person acting under color of law of the United States, a state, a subdivision of a state, or another public authority including the electorate.
"Person" includes any individual, corporation, association, organization, partnership, 2 or more persons having a joint or common interest, or other legal entity.
"Judicial claim" or "claim" include any lawsuit, cause of action, claim, cross-claim, counterclaim, or other judicial pleading or filing alleging injury.
"Motion" includes any motion to dismiss, for summary judgment, or to strike, or any other judicial pleading filed to dispose of a judicial claim.
"Moving party" means any person on whose behalf a motion described in subsection (a) of Section 20 is filed seeking dismissal of a judicial claim.
"Responding party" means any person against whom a motion described in subsection (a) of Section 20 is filed.
(Source: P.A. 95-506, eff. 8-28-07.)


(735 ILCS 110/15)
Sec. 15. Applicability. This Act applies to any motion to dispose of a claim in a judicial proceeding on the grounds that the claim is based on, relates to, or is in response to any act or acts of the moving party in furtherance of the moving party's rights of petition, speech, association, or to otherwise participate in government.
Acts in furtherance of the constitutional rights to petition, speech, association, and participation in government are immune from liability, regardless of intent or purpose, except when not genuinely aimed at procuring favorable government action, result, or outcome.
(Source: P.A. 95-506, eff. 8-28-07.)


(735 ILCS 110/20)
Sec. 20. Motion procedure and standards.
(a) On the filing of any motion as described in Section 15, a hearing and decision on the motion must occur within 90 days after notice of the motion is given to the respondent. An appellate court shall expedite any appeal or other writ, whether interlocutory or not, from a trial court order denying that motion or from a trial court's failure to rule on that motion within 90 days after that trial court order or failure to rule.
(b) Discovery shall be suspended pending a decision on the motion. However, discovery may be taken, upon leave of court for good cause shown, on the issue of whether the movants acts are not immunized from, or are not in furtherance of acts immunized from, liability by this Act.
(c) The court shall grant the motion and dismiss the judicial claim unless the court finds that the responding party has produced clear and convincing evidence that the acts of the moving party are not immunized from, or are not in furtherance of acts immunized from, liability by this Act.
(Source: P.A. 95-506, eff. 8-28-07.)


(735 ILCS 110/25)
Sec. 25. Attorney's fees and costs. The court shall award a moving party who prevails in a motion under this Act reasonable attorney's fees and costs incurred in connection with the motion.
(Source: P.A. 95-506, eff. 8-28-07.)


(735 ILCS 110/30)
Sec. 30. Construction of Act.
(a) Nothing in this Act shall limit or preclude any rights the moving party may have under any other constitutional, statutory, case or common law, or rule provisions.
(b) This Act shall be construed liberally to effectuate its purposes and intent fully.
(Source: P.A. 95-506, eff. 8-28-07.)


(735 ILCS 110/35)
Sec. 35. Severability. The provisions of this Act are severable under Section 1.31 of the Statute on Statutes.
(Source: P.A. 95-506, eff. 8-28-07.)


(735 ILCS 110/99)
Sec. 99. Effective date. This Act takes effect upon becoming law.
(Source: P.A. 95-506, eff. 8-28-07.)