ABSTRACT
This Note suggests that prominent male abusers are using defamation claims as a new retaliatory mechanism to silence their victims and control the narrative concerning the abuse allegations. To protect survivors, legislatures need to amend their anti-SLAPP statutes or courts need to adopt a bright line rule that sexual harassment is a matter of public concern. A matter of public concern shields defendants from defamation liability because matters of public concern lead to a ‘well-informed society’. If the law recognized that a good faith sexual harassment charge is a matter of public concern, defamation law would insulate survivors from liability. Part I begins with a discussion of the history of sexual harassment law and the evolution of the public’s perception of sexual harassment. This evolution centers around the Anita Hill/Clarence Thomas and Christine Blasey Ford/Brett Kavanaugh hearings and the #MeToo Movement. Part II provides an overview of defamation law and its intersection with sexual and domestic abuse. Part III analyzes Depp and argues the case is the perfect example of a successful retaliatory defamation suit. Part IV examines the aftermath of the trial and analyzes why the public vilified Heard and supported Depp. Part V analyzes why survivors share their stories and the potential consequences they face when sued for defamation by their abusers. Finally, in Part VI, this Note offers a suggestion for protecting survivors. It focuses on anti-SLAPP lawsuits, as they are the most effective way survivors can protect themselves against defamation suits.
Hiatt, Blaize, The Cultural Gagging of Women Through the Lens of Johnny Depp v Amber Heard: How Prominent Male Abusers Use Defamation Claims as a Retaliatory Mechanism to Silence Their Victims (March 11, 2023).
Leave a Reply