I. Understanding SLAPP and Its Application to Criminal Retaliation

A. Definition and Core Characteristics

Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPP) are legal actions filed not to win on the merits, but to burden defendants with litigation costs and intimidate them into silence1. While traditionally associated with civil defamation suits, the underlying principle—using legal process as a weapon to chill protected speech—applies equally to retaliatory criminal prosecutions23.

Key SLAPP Characteristics Present in Nuno's Case:

SLAPP Element Evidence in Nuno Case
Timing Criminal charges filed immediately after protected speech (YWCA complaint)4
Forum Shopping Multiple jurisdictions weaponized (Seattle, Edmonds Municipal, Edmonds Superior Court, Lynwood, Missoula)
Spurious Claims "Stalking" charges for written complaint + donation5
Escalating Tactics Dismissing/re-filing to increase bail
Resource Drain Forced relocation, $150k career loss
Chilling Effect Silenced legitimate grievances about harassment and civil rights violations

B. The Constitutional Intersection

SLAPP suits fundamentally violate the First Amendment's Petition Clause, which guarantees "the right of the people...to petition the government for a redress of grievances"6. As Judge Colabella noted in Gordon v. Marrone: "Short of a gun to the head, a greater threat to First Amendment expression can scarcely be imagined"6.

II. Montana's 2025 UPEPA: A Game-Changer

A. Statutory Framework

Montana's House Bill 292, enacted May 1, 2025, adopts the Uniform Public Expression Protection Act (UPEPA)7. This transforms Montana from having the nation's worst anti-SLAPP protections (0/100 score) to among the strongest8.

Key UPEPA Provisions:

  1. Broad Scope: Protects "exercise of the right of freedom of speech or of the press, the right to assemble or petition...on a matter of public concern"9
  2. Special Motion to Strike: Filed within 60 days, automatically stays proceedings7
  3. Burden Shifting:
  4. Mandatory Fee Award: Prevailing defendants recover attorney fees7
  5. Immediate Appeal Right: Denial of motion appealable8

B. Application to Criminal Retaliation

While UPEPA's text addresses "causes of action" (civil claims), its principles extend to criminal prosecutions used as SLAPP vehicles11:

  1. Retaliatory Prosecution Doctrine: Supreme Court recognizes First Amendment bars prosecution in retaliation for protected speech (Hartman v. Moore)12