Whether state anti-SLAPP fee-shifting provisions apply in federal court

QUESTIONS PRESENTED Like twenty-nine other states and the District of Columbia, New Mexico has enacted a_ statute specifically designed to deter SLAPP (“strategic lawsuits against public participation”) lawsuits, which unduly discourage speech and engagement about matters of public concern. New Mexico’s “anti-SLAPP” statute requires expedited disposition of dismissal motions and an award of attorneys’ fees and costs to a prevailing defendant. In the decision below, the Tenth Circuit held that those provisions are inoperative in federal court—deepening an entrenched circuit split on the applicability of state anti-SLAPP provisions in federal court. The questions presented are: 1. Whether a state anti-SLAPP provision requiring an award of attorneys’ fees and costs to a prevailing defendant applies in federal court—as the First, Second, Fifth and Ninth Circuits have concluded, in conflict with the D.C. Circuit and the Tenth Circuit below. 2. Whether a state anti-SLAPP provision requiring expedited disposition of dismissal motions applies in federal court, as the First and Fifth Circuits have concluded, in conflict with the D.C. Circuit and the Tenth Circuit below.