By Robert Milligan, Joshua Salinas, and Jeffrey Oh

Balancing the rights of businesses to protect their economic interests with the rights of individuals to freely express themselves can be a complicated act requiring nuanced application of the law; even more so when the business is of a religious nature. In a fascinating case out of

Under California Civil Procedure Code section 425.16, a defendant sued for exercising its constitutional rights may assert that the action is Strategic Litigation Against Public Participation (“SLAPP”) and move to strike the complaint on that basis. Section 425.16, also known as the “anti-SLAPP statute,” when properly invoked, can be a powerful defense tool because it imposes