The Huffington Post reported that the City Paper is alleging the lawsuit is a SLAPP suit (strategic lawsuit against public participation), which, as HuffPost explains, is “a lawsuit that is intended to censor, intimidate and silence critics by burdening them with the cost of a legal defense until they abandon their criticism or opposition.”
In the City Paper’s response to the lawsuit (See iMediaEthics’ stories on the lawsuit here), the newspaper reportedly commented that Snyder has changed portions of his lawsuit over time, including changing the place of the lawsuit, allegations of anti-Semitism and more.
As the City Paper explains:
You May Also Like...
“Snyder has moved from complaining publicly about statements that, on inspection, appear nowhere in the Commentary; to suing over artwork that any first-year law student knows is not the proper basis for a defamation action; to his current Complaint, which wrenches out of context substantially accurate accounts of his prior conduct.”
Huffington Post noted that when Snyder first filed his lawsuit, his “legal team” mentioned that the City Paper’s expenses in defending itself during the lawsuit “would presumably quickly outstrip the value of the Washington City Paper,” a statement which seemingly supports the City Paper’s allegations of a SLAPP suit.
Read more on the Huffington Post’s website here.