S.B. 444 was approved by the Nevada Senate on April 15 and is going to be considered by the Nevada Assembly Judiciary Committee on Friday. Marc Randazza, a First Amendment attorney who was instrumental in getting the law enacted in the first place, sums up what S.B. 444 will do to the anti-SLAPP law:

It creates a Rube Goldberg mechanism for bringing an Anti-SLAPP motion — which will clearly increase the cost of litigation.

It narrows the definition of “issue of public concern” – so consumer reviews, social commentary, and other forms of important public speech are now outside of its protection.

It weakens the attorneys’ fees provisions of the existing law.

It lowers the burden for unethical plaintiffs to keep their SLAPP suits alive.

It repeals important provisions that seek to deter plaintiffs from filing anti-SLAPP suits in the first place.

It is tailor-made to ensure that public figures do not have to be worried about New York Times v. Sullivan at the SLAPP stage, anyhow.

It virtually ensures that you can’t ever bring an Anti-SLAPP motion in federal court.

What can you do if you’re in favor of keeping the strong anti-SLAPP law in Nevada? Let your voice be heard here.