PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on the Constitution and Civil Justice.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · May 13, 2015
Securing Participation, Engagement, and Knowledge Freedom by Reducing Egregious Efforts Act of 2015 or the SPEAK FREE Act of 2015
Amends the federal judicial code to allow a person against whom a lawsuit is asserted to file a special motion to dismiss claims referred to as strategic lawsuits against public participation ("SLAPP suits") that arise from an oral or written statement or other expression, or conduct in furtherance of such expression, by the defendant in connection with an official proceeding or about a matter of public concern.
Defines "matter of public concern" as an issue related to: (1) health or safety; (2) environmental, economic, or community well-being; (3) the government; (4) a public official or public figure; or (5) a good, product, or service in the marketplace.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires courts to grant such a special motion to dismiss if the party filing the motion makes a prima facie showing that the claim asserted against them is a SLAPP suit, unless the responding party demonstrates that the claim is likely to succeed on the merits.
Provides exceptions prohibiting courts from granting such a special motion to dismiss if the claim concerns:
a government enforcement action,
a business making representations of fact in commercial speech to consumers about its own or a business competitor's goods or services, or
a public interest claim on behalf of the general public.
Allows dismissal of private suits, notwithstanding such commercial speech and public interest exceptions, if the claim is against:
a person or entity engaged in activities to disseminate or express ideas to the public in a book or academic journal;
any person or entity based upon statements or conduct concerning the creation, dissemination, exhibition, advertisement, or other promotion of journalistic, consumer commentary, dramatic, literary, musical, political, or artistic works, including motion pictures, television programs, or articles published online or in a newspaper or magazine of general circulation; or
a nonprofit organization that receives more than 50% of annual revenue grants or awards from, programs of, or reimbursements for services rendered to the government.
Sets forth special procedural requirements for discovery and motions.
Requires courts to award litigation costs, expert witness fees, and reasonable attorney's fees to private parties that filed and prevailed on certain motions under this Act or to parties that responded to motions found to be frivolous.
People & committees
Rep. Farenthold, Blake [R-TX-27] · R–TX
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on the Constitution and Civil Justice.
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 12, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.2304 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.2304 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.2304 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.2304 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.