Although rare, from time to time an employer may sue a current or former employee who makes negative public comments about the employer. In such cases, the employer may allege that the employee’s comments constitute defamation or tortiously interfered with the employer’s business relationships.
Not surprisingly, the threat of litigation can have a substantial deterrent effect, not only upon the employee threatened with litigation but on their colleagues as well. As a result, employees may choose not to speak publicly, even with respect to matters of public concern.
To offset this effect, many states and the District of Columbia have enacted some version of the Uniform Public Expression Protection Act (UPEPA), or state Anti-SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) laws. On March 24, 2026, Michigan will become the 39th state to enact an Anti-SLAPP law to protect and provide remedies to individuals who are sued for exercising their First Amendment rights to free speech and expression on matters of public concern.
In states like Michigan with Anti-SLAPP laws, employees can file a motion to dismiss the litigation before the expensive and time-consuming process begins. If successful, the employee may recover their attorneys’ fees and court costs from the employer that filed the legally meritless action, not only making the aggrieved employee whole but deterring employers from filing similar lawsuits against employees in the future.
Anti-SLAPP laws vary across...
A federal appeals court has revived a whistleblower-led False Claims Act suit alleging AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Novartis and Sanofi overcharged Medicare and Medicaid through 340B “penny pricing” viola...