Steve Cohen to the rescue? |
In a Roll Call opinion piece, Cohen said:
"The City Paper’s column was admittedly harsh but well within the bounds of free speech, especially about a public figure. Snyder was understandably angry, but instead of fighting speech with more speech, he chose to use the courts for his personal revenge. Whatever you may think of Snyder and the Redskins, the courts are not the appropriate forum for resolving these sorts of grudges.
Snyder’s own attorney seemed to acknowledge the true intention of his lawsuit in a letter to the hedge fund that owns the newspaper, the original object of his suit. He wrote: 'Mr. Snyder has more than sufficient means to protect his reputation and defend himself and his wife against your paper’s concerted attempt at character assassination. We presume defending such litigation would not be a rational strategy for an investment firm such as yours. Indeed, the cost of litigation would presumably quickly outstrip the value of the Washington City Paper.'
This is exactly what SLAPPs are all about. They are used to silence and harass critics by forcing them to spend countless time and resources defending against them. SLAPPs use the courts as a weapon to stifle participation in government and chill expression about matters of public interest."
Bravo, sir. Snyder's lawsuit is intended to harass and intimidate the media because poor little Danny got his feelings hurt. Since this is far from a congressional priority, it's unlikely that Cohen's legislation would take effect (or even pass) before Snyder's suit is resolved. At least someone with real authority sees through Snyder and doesn't like what he sees. Hopefully this legislative proposal will scare Snyder in the same way he is trying to scare reporters. Congress makes more than its share of mistakes, but at least sometimes it gets things right.
No comments:
Post a Comment