A SLAAP lawsuit is a strategic lawsuit against public participation (SLAPP) is a lawsuit intended to censor, intimidate, and silence critics by burdening them with the cost of a legal defense until they abandon their criticism or opposition.

A common feature of SLAPPs is forum shopping, wherein plaintiffs find courts that are more favorable towards the claims to be brought than the court in which the defendant (or sometimes plaintiffs) live.

Why are SLAPPs used? One of the key characteristics of a SLAPP suit is that the lawsuit is not necessarily designed to achieve a favorable verdict. Instead, it is designed to intimidate the target in order to discourage them and others from speaking out on an issue of public importance.

Other widely mentioned elements of a SLAPP are the actual effectiveness at silencing critics, the timing of the suit, inclusion of extra or spurious defendants (such as relatives or hosts of legitimate defendants), inclusion of plaintiffs with no real claim (such as corporations that are affiliated with legitimate plaintiffs), making claims that are very difficult to disprove or rely on no written record, ambiguous or deliberately mangled wording that lets plaintiffs make spurious allegations without fear of perjury, refusal to consider any settlement (or none other than cash), characterization of all offers to settle as insincere, extensive and unnecessary demands for discovery, attempts to identify anonymous or pseudonymous critics, appeals on minor points of law, demands for broad rulings when appeal is accepted on such minor points of law, and attempts to run up defendants, costs even if this clearly costs more to the plaintiffs

“These types of lawsuits clog the court systems and waste not only defendants & money, but taxpayers money as well”. – Public Participation Project