Bill to weaken Nevada’s anti-SLAPP statute called dead

Nevada Assemblyman Ira Hansen, R-Sparks, speaks on the Assembly floor at the Legislative Building in Carson City on Tuesday, Feb. 17, 2015. (Cathleen Allison/Las Vegas Review-Journal)

CARSON CITY — A bill sought by Wynn Resorts that critics said would have substantially weakened Nevada’s anti-SLAPP statute is dead after a lawmaker said Thursday it won’t come up for a vote in his committee.

Assembly Judiciary Chairman Ira Hansen, R-Sparks, said Senate Bill 444 will not come up for a vote at a Friday work session. The bill would need to get a favorable vote in the committee by Friday to stay alive in the 2015 legislative session.

SLAPP lawsuits, an acronym meaning strategic lawsuit against public participation, are aimed at stifling free speech when individuals speak out on issues of public concern.

Anti-SLAPP laws are meant to protect against intimidation by organizations that can use the threat of a meritless civil lawsuit to stifle debate.

The bill flew through the state Senate last month without opposition.

But opponents, including media representatives, strongly objected to the measure at the hearing in the Assembly committee.

“Anti-SLAPP statutes are important to protect free speech, because sometimes people sue just to silence their critics,” said Barry Smith, executive director of the Nevada Press Association, in comments ahead of the Assembly hearing. “After 2013, Nevada had one of the strongest anti-SLAPP laws in the country. SB444 would weaken it substantially.”

But proponents said the bill would bring balance to the law. The bill was drafted on behalf of Wynn Resorts and would have made several changes to Nevada’s anti-SLAPP law to give those who filed defamation lawsuits more leeway to show the merits of such actions.

Nevada’s law was strengthened in the 2013 Legislature and is now considered to be one of the strongest in the country.

Mitchell Langberg, outside counsel to Wynn Resorts and an expert on anti-SLAPP statutes, said in earlier testimony that the 2013 changes went too far in favor of defendants in defamation actions.

Wynn was involved in defamation lawsuit where California’s anti-SLAPP statute resulted in the case being dismissed. Wynn sued for slander in federal court in California against hedge fund manager Jim Chanos for comments made at a symposium that included the statement of Chanos’ uncertainty “about the questionable business methods in Macau.”

Wynn was represented by Langberg, but the lawsuit was dismissed in March with prejudice, meaning it cannot be refiled. The decision is on appeal.

Contact Sean Whaley at swhaley@reviewjournal.com or 775-687-3900. Find him on Twitter: @seanw801.