Comments on: Libel Tourism, American Style

By: damnum absque injuria » Honorable But Mistaken Attorney of the Day: Robert F. Bauer

Mon, 06 Oct 2008 11:01:24 +0000

[...] this screed, but in the end, all it got me was a Pattericolanche, an Unclelanche, an Instalanche, a some-other-guy-at-Pajamas-Media-lanche, a Flakealanche, a mention in the Washington Times and the prospect of a brief radio interview. [...]

By: Kirk Parker

Kirk Parker — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 16:03:57 +0000

I have been a libel tourist myself, in the sense that I have sued foreign publications in both England and Italy

Where those British and Italian publications? If so, going to their home country to file suit doesn’t really seem like the kind of forum-shopping that is implied by “libel tourism” in the ordinary sense of the phrase.

By: Some Law Talkign Guy

Some Law Talkign Guy — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 12:41:26 +0000

Actually, the “Sword and Shield” criticism of the House bill is not all that relevant. California and other states have had Anti-SLAPP (”Suits Lodged Against Public Participation”) laws for years, and they really do discourage a lot of the frivolous libel/disparagement claims. Under an Anti-SLAPP statute, when you face a libel claim for exercising expressing yourself within NYT v. Sullivan, you basically counterclaim for your attorney’s time plus some measure of damages.

Since you can’t “defend” the foreign suit in a U.S. Court, the House bill seems to be aimed at letting you bring the counterclaim for whatever damages some sleazy British court awards, plus your attorney’s fees and some measure of Anti-SLAPP damages. I’m no fan of the Dems who introduced the bill, but if it’s a clean version of a foreign judgment Anti-SLAPP, it will do wonders to protect Americans overseas to the same extent they are protected here.

I may be wrong, but I don’t see the bill as a bad thing.

By: Karl Hallowell

Karl Hallowell — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 06:22:14 +0000

“If any candidate can prove that his opponent is lying about the facts, his remedy is the same as yours or mine: fight it out in the brawl that is American politics.”

If it’s genuine slander or libel, the courts are indeed the place for this. OTOH, fairy tales in the form of cease and desist letters are not.

By: McCarroll

McCarroll — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 04:23:29 +0000

Today’s Media Question: What’s Black and White and Red all over?

Obama and Biden.

By: vince52

vince52 — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 02:15:48 +0000

In its pre-constitutionalized form (pre-1964), libel was strict liability. That means liability without fault if you publish something false and defamatory, no matter how reasonable you were in your belief. Is that really what the OP wants? So if Kerry wants to sue you for challenging his heroic credentials, you have to try to outspend John Kerry to prove that he is the pusillanimous fraud that he is. Sounds like people who want to keep their homes won’t get into a fight with John Kerry. Is that really what you want? It would certainly deter me from expressing my well-grounded views concerning John Kerry’s credentials as a war hero. Liability without fault is the law in the UK and the vast majority of countries, and it’s one of the reasons why rich people get away with even more there than they do here.

By: 11B40

11B40 — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 01:43:24 +0000

Greetings:

Today’s Media Question: What’s Black and White and Red all over?

By: NahnCee

NahnCee — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 01:06:20 +0000

What if Obama is receiving Saudi funding into his campaign coffers? It would make sense, then, that who-ever was giving him the money might suggest that same tactics that have been used successfully elewhere.

I just don’t understand the American attorneys, judges and police in Missouri who appear to be so willing to go against their oaths of office to cheerfully trample on fellow citizens’ Constitutional freedom of speech rights … which EVERYone involved must know would be overthrow in court eventually. Doubtless with gazillions of dollars of resulting lawsuit payouts to those Americans who refuse to be muzzled (as well as Canadians like Mark Steyn).

By: John

John — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 00:55:11 +0000

The prospect of an Obama administration Justice Department rolling out the full might of the federal government to silence, nay punish, critics of Obama scares me more than almost any of the other very frightening things Obama proposes.

By: Larry J

Larry J — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 00:54:25 +0000

Could those Missouri “public officials” be subject to a recall or impeachment? It sure sounds like they’re violating their oath of office (”preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution”). It’s time to bring some severe stink on them, perhaps the equivalent of a SLAP action.