PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Courts and Competition Policy.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Dec 16, 2009
Citizen Participation Act of 2009 - Declares that Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPPs), filed against thousands of individuals, organizations, and businesses based upon their valid exercise of the rights to petition or free speech, are an abuse of the judicial process that waste judicial resources and clog the already over-burdened court dockets.
Declares immune from civil liability any act of petitioning the government made without knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard of falsity. Requires a plaintiff (especially in a SLAPP) to prove knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard of falsity by clear and convincing evidence.
Provides that any act in futherance of the constitutional right of petition or free speech shall be entitled to the procedural protections provided in this Act.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Allows a party to file a special motion to dismiss any claim arising from an act or alleged act in furtherance of the constitutional right of petition or free speech within 45 days after service of the claim if the claim was filed in federal court or, if the claim was removed to federal court pursuant to this Act, within 15 days after removal.
Exempts from this Act: (1) certain procedural protections in any action brought solely on behalf of the public or solely to enforce an important right affecting the public interest; and (2) certain claims for relief involving commercial speech.
People & committees
Rep. Cohen, Steve [D-TN-9] · D–TN
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 Courts and Competition Policy.
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 14, 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.4364 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.4364 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.4364 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.4364 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.