A Matter of Public Concern: Wright v. Dorsey and the Need For Speech Protections Beyond Anti-SLAPP Law

Wright v. Dorsey, a recent defamation case, demonstrates the limitations of anti-SLAPP ("Strategic Litigation Against Public Participation") law and the need for supplemental speech protections. Joshua Wright, an antitrust law practitioner and former professor, sued Elyse Dorsey and Angela Landry for defamation. Dorsey and Landry had claimed that Wright used his position as their professor (and later employer) to pressure them into non-consensual sexual relationships; Wright acknowledged their relationships but claimed they were fully consensual, and that stating otherwise was defamatory. Anti-SLAPP law failed to protect Dorsey and Landry even though Wright's lawsuit was ultimately a SLAPP. To better protect defendants against lawsuits like Wright, anti-SLAPP law should be supplemented by a "but-for causation," test which considers whether the plaintiff would have suffered damages had the defendants not made the allegedly defamatory statements.