PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. (text of measure as introduced: CR S5984-5985)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Aug 2, 2012
Free Press Act of 2012 - Amends the federal judicial code to authorize a representative of the news media to file a special motion to dismiss any claim asserted against such representative in a civil action if the claim arises from an oral or written statement or other expression that is on a matter of public concern or that relates to a public official or figure (thereby establishing a judicial procedure to seek dismissal of what are commonly referred to as "Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation" [SLAPPs]).
Places the burden on the party asserting the claim, after such a motion is properly brought, to prove the claim is legally sufficient and supported by facts sufficient to sustain a favorable judgment. Requires the dismissal with prejudice of any such claim challenged with a motion to dismiss for which the party asserting the claim fails to meet that burden.
Prohibits such a special motion to dismiss from being filed against a claim: (1) brought by the federal government or a state attorney general, or (2) arising out of a statement offering or promoting the sale of the goods or services of the person making the statement.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Authorizes a person whose personally identifying information is sought in connection with a claim that arises in whole or in part from an oral or written statement or other expression that is on a matter of public concern or that relates to a public official or figure, or a person from whom such information is sought in connection with such a claim, to file a special motion to quash the request or order to produce the information. Places a similar burden of proof on the party making the request for such information, after a special motion to quash is properly brought, to show that the claim is legally sufficient and supported by appropriate evidence.
Permits a civil action in a state court that raises a claim arising out of speech on public issues to be removed to federal court by a party who seeks to file a special motion to dismiss asserting a colorable defense based on the Constitution or laws of the United States. Allows the removal of a state court proceeding to federal court by a party who seeks to file a special motion to quash, but only with respect to the proceeding to quash the request for personally identifying information and not the remainder of the civil action.
People & committees
Sen. Kyl, Jon [R-AZ] · R–AZ
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. (text of measure as introduced: CR S5984-5985)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S5983-5984)
Introduced in Senate
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 10, 2026. 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 S.3493 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 S.3493 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 S.3493 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 S.3493 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.