The protection of 47.1 and the real SURVIVOR who created
I’m intrigued by this 47.1 claim and fell down a rabbit hole. I have read arguments from both sides. Most notably, a letter that Victoria Burke, Esq. - the “architect” behind the legislation known as the “Speak Your Truth Act” AB 933 (California Civil Code § 47.1) - wrote to the Maryland Senate to support this bill for their state. Her story is heartbreaking. A TRUE survivor. Included in snapshots.
Two major components of why the 47.1 was created:
1.) incentivize attorneys to take on these difficult cases despite survivors’ often-limited financial resources, and
2.) disincentivizes the filing of frivolous, retaliatory lawsuits by abusers designed solely to intimidate and silence those making claims.
This bill is intended to correct the imbalance by ensuring that survivors are not punished financially for telling the truth. Without this protection, silence remains the rational economic choice.
**** At what point (if any) does the intent of why this bill was built is viewed against the context of this case? ***
As a non-attorney, Lively pushing use of this bill is a stretch. That’s my opinion based on how the intent of this law reads. It’s to PROTECT survivors who are often discouraged from coming forward for fear of enduring expensive and drawn out litigations by the hands of their abusers. An intimidation tactic “serial abusers” use who often have all the power and unlimited resources to silence those speaking up. Abusers who bury their accusers in defamation claim fees before even getting to trial.
If anything, Lively probably thought she could bury Baldoni in legal fees. Lively has had all the power from the jump. She was and has never been afraid to speak up. She took out an article in the NYT with serious allegations. At what point did Baldoni and Wayfarer have a right to stand up for themselves? The 47.1 is to ensure laws are not weaponized against survivors by “serial predators.” It comes off, that Lively is trying to activate this new bill out of context. Trying to get a free lunch when she has a private chef at home.
I surmise TRUE survivors seeking justice, would take the shield of 47.1 and fight all the way to trial. Blake had the opportunity to be the poster child for this new bill. Instead she settled her case, not out of fear of speaking up, rather what truths would be told. It speaks volumes on her integrity.
___________________________________
Excerpts from Victoria’s HB 465 Letter to Maryland Senate Committee
“The fear of defamation litigation is one of the most powerful tools used to silence survivors of sexual assault. The** **Stop Silencing Survivors Act restores balance by protecting truthful, good-faith speech while preserving due process and accountability.
WHAT THE BILL DOES AND DOES NOT DO
“What the bill does is establish a clear legal presumption that survivors who speak in good faith about sexual assault are protected from retaliatory lawsuits. Importantly, it allows prevailing survivor-defendants to recover attorney’s fees.
Some may ask why truthful speech alone is not sufficient protection under existing defamation law. The answer is that even when a survivor ultimately prevails, the harm has already been done. **Defending a defamation lawsuit can cost hundreds of thousands of dollars, and under current law, a survivor who wins must still bear their own attorney’s fees. **The result is a second injury, severe financial harm, imposed by a lawsuit that is later shown to be meritless.
This bill corrects that imbalance by ensuring that survivors are not punished financially for telling the truth. Without this protection, silence remains the rational economics choice.