Ah, that’s different then. I am sympathetic to your viewpoint but unfortunately it seems that we no longer are playing on a level field.
Not to mention the very lawmakers who need to pass such laws on a national level are the very ones abusing the courts. Devin Nunes is one of the most egregious offenders.
https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/truth-social-ceo-devin-...
At this point I feel that this is as close to an end run around the 1a as you can get.
I think we generally agree more than we disagree, but it's difficult to have a dialog when while I'm typing a response, your existing comment morphs underneath me.
I’m curious to hear more about your viewpoint. I’ll refrain from editing my comments.
The existing protections against this are not sufficient: where anti-SLAPP laws exist, they're often not expansive enough to cover the novel ways that the courts are being weaponized, and where they don't exist, plaintiffs continue to venue shop to improve their position.
That still doesn't suggest to me that the solution is for otherwise well-intentioned actors to steer into the skid. At best, Lego/Nestle/etc would make a political point and then lose their case. At worst, they would win, setting damaging precedent for future suits by the very people they're trying to oppose.