No. 22-156

David Douglas Fennell v. Rob Bonta, Attorney General of California

Lower Court: Ninth Circuit
Docketed: 2022-08-18
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Response Waived
Tags: anti-SLAPP-law civil-rights constitutional-rights equal-protection federal-preemption free-speech jury-trial jury-trial-rights political-assembly right-to-assemble
Key Terms:
JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference: 2022-09-28
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Is California's anti-SLAPP law constitutional?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED Is California’s anti-SLAPP law which allows California to ban Republicans from assembling and running for office as a “matter of public interest” in violation of the U.S. Constitutions Right to Assemble? Does California’s anti-SLAPP law which redefines Federal white-collar crime and political influence peddling as legal as a “matter of public interest” cause a conflict between California and Federal law that needs to be decided by the highest court? Can you apply California’s anti-SLAPP law against Republicans and not Democrats or does that violate the U.S. Constitution’s equal protection clause? Similar anti-SLAPP laws have been struck down in other states as unconstitutional as it deprives citizens access to a jury trial; shouldn’t the California anti-SLAPP law be struck down on similar grounds?

Docket Entries

2022-10-03
Petition DENIED.
2022-08-31
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/28/2022.
2022-08-19
Waiver of right of respondent Rob Bonta, California Attorney General to respond filed.
2022-03-28
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due September 19, 2022)

Attorneys

David Douglas Fennell
David Douglas Fennell — Petitioner
Rob Bonta, California Attorney General
Natasha Saggar ShethOffice of the California Attorney General, Respondent