A chilling effect in a warming world: how the threat of SLAPPs shapes climate law

Strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs) are meritless cases filed by powerful actors seeking to silence their critics through costly, protracted litigation. As climate change litigation (CCL) against corporations has surged since the Paris Agreement, so too has the threat of retaliatory SLAPPs against climate activists. In the US, activists must weigh the threat of being entangled in a resource-depleting SLAPP in decisions around whether, and where, to file strategic CCL. SLAPPs so burden the courts and contravene democratic values that 35 states and the District of Columbia have laws attempting to restrict them. How does spatial and temporal variation in legal protections afforded by state anti-SLAPP laws affect activists’ willingness to sue corporations over climate change? Analyzing CCL caseloads in American courts between 2015 and 2024, I find jurisdictions with anti-SLAPP protections attract corporate CCL, indicating that legislative action on free speech helps shape the development of climate law.