The Oklahoma Bar Journal August 2022

O NE LIMITATION OF TRADITIONAL FIRST AMENDMENT jurisprudence is that the guarantees of free speech, free association, free press and free exercise of religion generally restrict only governmental infringement. Otherwise, the First Amendment and other laws have done little to protect non-governmental persons and entities from filing spurious litigation to chill, squelch and intimidate citizens from speaking out on matters of public concern.

recognized the need for laws to prevent and quash suits that are based primarily on a citizen’s exer cise of their right to participate in public forums. 4 The five com mon causes of action asserted by SLAPP suit filers are defamation, business torts, process violations, conspiracy and constitutional and civil rights violations. 5 The public policy interest of protecting against SLAPP suits is so fundamental and widespread that 28 states have adopted anti SLAPP legislation to protect innocent defendants. 6 In fact, defendants in such suits are gener ally referred to as “targets” rather than “defendants.” 7 Anti-SLAPP legislation, such as the OCPA, is designed to allow for and protect: public comment and criticism in forums such as city council and school board meetings, grievances against governmental agencies and public officials and negative opinions expressed about public figures. 8 The OCPA is unequivocal in prohibiting suits based upon

such activities. It provides for a swift summary dismissal proce dure for any such suit. The Oklahoma Legislature has declared the OCPA “shall be construed liberally to effectuate its purpose and intent fully.” 9 Therefore, Oklahoma’s courts have established an early and firm precedent of construing the OCPA liberally in favor of protecting Oklahomans’ First Amendment rights. 10 “The Oklahoma judiciary has articulated a policy concern for protecting petitioning activ ities and has applied this policy by liberally defining the statutory requirements … so that immunity is available in a wide variety of situations.” 11 HOW THE OCPA WORKS Time is of the essence for a suc cessful OCPA motion. A motion to dismiss based upon the OCPA must be asserted within 60 days of service upon the defendant. 12 There are exceptions for good cause if the filing is not timely,

Thus, the need for the Oklahoma Citizens Participation Act (OCPA). The OCPA was enacted “to encourage and safeguard the constitutional rights of persons to petition, speak freely, associate freely and otherwise participate in government to the maximum extent permitted by law and, at the same time, protect the rights of a person to file meritorious lawsuits for demonstrable injury.” 1 The legislative concept behind the OCPA originated in the 1980s, but the OCPA did not become law in Oklahoma until much later. The Legislature unanimously passed the OCPA in the 2014 legislative session, and Gov. Mary Fallin approved it April 22, 2014. 2 The current version is codified at 12 O.S. §1430. It provides “a new summary process/dismissal pro cedure in certain cases.” 3 The OCPA is an example of anti-SLAPP legislation. SLAPP stands for Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation, and a majority of states have now

AUGUST 2022 | 11

THE OKLAHOMA BAR JOURNAL