Progress today on getting witnesses to testify on two of my bills.

A Department of Social Services facility in Northwest Baltimore was closed last year.

The notice to the affected community was inadequate.

House Bill 1138 would require notice of a closure and, in some instances, a public meeting.

I’ve been working with a religious leader on this issue, but he will be out of the country when my bill is heard.

I’ve asked him if he knows people who were affected by the closure.

I’ve also asked my Constituent Director, Jackie Greenfield, if she knows of anyone.

—

My SLAPP bill has passed the House several times but not the Senate.

It would make it more difficult to file a frivolous lawsuit to intimidate someone exercising their First Amendment rights.

Since the Senate committee has heard the bill before, the hearing is limited to the bill’s sponsor and only two witnesses from the public.

A survivor of domestic violence has contacted me.

She has written two published articles about her abuse.

She has been legally threatened for her writing by her abuser.

We can’t add her to the witness list for the hearing, but we will try to arrange for her to meet with committee members whose votes we need and can get.

Waiting for my SLAPP bill to be heard in the Judiciary Committee, I scanned the room.

A majority of the committee members, it seemed, were new to Annapolis and the committee.

A good thing that I had not taken the hearing for granted.

I was ready to discuss the bill as if it had not already passed the House of Delegates  three times.

“A frivolous lawsuit to intimidate someone from exercising their First Amendment rights,” I began my testimony, “is a SLAPP suit.”

The only opponent was the Executive Director of Maryland Right to Life.

She asserted that my legislation would “create a huge legal loophole for news outlets and other bad actors to evade legal liability for acts of defamation.”

The Supreme Court of the United States determines the legal standard for defamation, not the General Assembly of Maryland.

This pro-life group opposed last year’s bill.

In response to my inquiry, the Attorney General’s office wrote that it’s legal argument was unsound.

I will again share that response with the committee.

Don’t take anything for granted.

My first bill hearing of the session is this Wednesday.

It’s my SLAPP legislation, which would strengthen the protections against frivolous lawsuits.

The most frequent example: a developer sues neighborhood residents who oppose his project.

My bill has passed the House three times.

However, it’s yet to receive a committee vote in the Senate.

As I was revising my written testimony for the House Judiciary Committee, I reminded myself, “Even though a majority of the committee has voted favorably on this legislation, don’t assume that the votes are there.”

I’ve also reached out to people and organizations that would be effective advocates in the Senate.

It was if I had written the script.

A builder filed a $25 million lawsuit against the residents of the Clipper Mill community who objected to his proposed development.

This is a SLAPP suit.

A Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation is designed to intimidate citizens from participating in a public process.  To keep them from exercising their First Amendment rights before a public body, in this instance the Baltimore City Planning Commission.

I introduced the bill that enables a judge to dismiss a SLAPP suit.  Instead of spending time and money in burdensome pre-trial hearings, a person or a community can ask a judge to find that they have been SLAPP’ed.  If the judge agrees, the suit is dismissed – much earlier than is normally the case.

The sticking point in this instance was the law’s requirement to prove that the SLAPP suit was brought in “bad faith.”

The judge found that it was.

As fate would have it, I am introducing a bill that would remove the “bad faith” requirement from the law.

This legislation passed the House of Delegates in March but was not acted upon by the Senate since we adjourned early.

I will ask one of the Clipper Mill residents who was SLAPPed to testify for the bill.

It’s always better to personalize the case for your bill.

Developer Larry Jennings loses his $25 million suit against Clipper Mill residents | Baltimore Brew

“Some pretty big bullies.”

I had used words like meritless, frivolous and intimidating.

Both the witness and I were testifying on behalf of my SLAPP bill.

A SLAPP is a Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation.

Such lawsuits are often brought by a business against a private citizen, who spoke out against a development proposal in his or her neighborhood.

An exercise of First Amendment rights.

To get the bill passed, we will need to make sure that our proposed changes to the existing SLAPP law are precise and achieve our policy objectives.

In the hallway after our hearing, I discussed potential amendments with the bill’s supporters – lawyers and otherwise.

But when the Judiciary Committee votes on my bill, , I think the delegates will remember that my bill is needed because we’re dealing with “some pretty big bullies.”