Final Analysis: Can West SLAPP His Way Out?
It’s unlikely. Even if a court grants Step One of the anti-SLAPP analysis, Swift would likely satisfy Step Two based on:
- Verifiable falsity,
- Public dissemination,
- Malice rooted in animus and reckless disregard,
- And reputational harm presumed under defamation per se.
“SLAPP protections exist to guard public dialogue, not weaponize celebrity influence to make unprovable, reputation-killing allegations,” – Samuel Lopez, USA Herald
Follow us on X:
👉 Follow USA Herald on X @RealUSAHerald for breaking legal coverage, celebrity justice updates, and investigative reports.
For deeper breakdowns of anti-SLAPP litigation, including how public figures like Swift can use (or defend against) these laws, join me at Legal Insights & Strategies by Samuel Lopez on Patreon.
Fact-Check Sources & Authority
- California Code of Civil Procedure §425.16
- California Civil Code §45a
- Baral v. Schnitt (2016) 1 Cal.5th 376
- Weinberg v. Feisel (2003) 110 Cal.App.4th 1122
- Taus v. Loftus (2007) 40 Cal.4th 683
- Khawar v. Globe Int’l, Inc. (1998) 19 Cal.4th 254
- New York Times Co. v. Sullivan (1964) 376 U.S. 254
- Code Civ. Proc. §527.6
Disclaimer:
This information is for general knowledge and informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.
