Photo by BenBalter.D.C. Attorney General Irv Nathan has finally produced some thoughts on the lawsuit filed by R******s owner Dan Snyder against Washington City Paper and columnist Dave McKenna — and, not surprisingly, he’s coming down on the side of the journalists. In a motion filed yesterday in D.C. Superior Court, Nathan argues that if the court agrees with a motion that contends the District’s anti-SLAPP laws are unconsitutional, it would “cast grave doubt on the validity of that legislation.”
The District passed laws prohibiting strategic lawsuits against public participation last year; in August, Snyder’s counsel filed a motion to dismiss a City Paper motion claiming protection under said law, arguing that the legislation does not protect claims made in McKenna’s “The Cranky Redskins Fan’s Guide to Dan Snyder” because they were not a “matter of public concern.”
Nathan’s motion — embedded in full below — contends that Snyder’s challenge is not only a challenge to the City Paper’s First Amendment rights, but also a hit job on the ability of the District to govern itself.
“[T]he resolution of plaintiff’s challenge to the validity of the statute could impair the District’s ability to protect its interests,” Nathan writes. “It is clearly possible that, if the Court rules in favor of plaintiff’s assertions regarding the Anti-SLAPP Act, it would cast grave doubt on the validity of that legislation, and could have a profound impact on the rights of political participants in the District of Columbia who would otherwise seek to invoke the protections of the Anti-SLAPP statute.”
The next hearing in the case will take place on October 14.
