Update: Louisiana sheriff’s raid on blogger’s home is a post from Overlawyered - Chronicling the high cost of our legal system

Libel, slander, and defamation roundup is a post from Overlawyered - Chronicling the high cost of our legal system

“To: brandenforcements@… Mr. Forcements — may I call you Branden?” is a post from Overlawyered - Chronicling the high cost of our legal system

Ken White, an attorney who writes for the legal blog Popehat, agreed that McMansion Hell would qualify as fair use. Because Zillow and McMansion Hell aren’t competing businesses, he said, “all of the fair use factors are in the bloggers’ favor.”

Zillow appears to have been trying to “make a satirical blogger shut up rather than face the costs of vexatious litigation,” White told BuzzFeed News.

Zillow cease-and-desist closes McMansion Hell blog is a post from Overlawyered - Chronicling the high cost of our legal system

The dog-owning residents sued the neighbors, along with the condo association and other defendants. They cited federal legal interpretations, which have since been buttressed by a regulation issued in the Obama administration, that hold it “hostile environment harassment” under the Fair Housing Act to make statements that “interfere” with another’s exercise of rights under the law.

Now the Third Circuit, as part of a decision resolving numerous issues about the case, reversed grants of summary judgment in favor of the two blog writers and ruled that they could properly be sued for damages for creating a hostile environment under the Fair Housing Act. It described as “harassment” various instances of their critical speech and noted that a single instance of harassing speech could give rise to liability under the law. It is not clear whether the parties raised, and the court did not make any gesture toward considering, whether some or all of the statements involved might be protected by the First Amendment, which is mentioned nowhere in the opinion. [Revock v. Cowpet Bay West Condominium Association et al., see relevant section VI, pp. 31-41 of opinion via John Ross, Short Circuit]

As Hans Bader of the Competitive Enterprise Institute has pointed out, the Ninth Circuit in 2000 slapped down federal officials for having investigated Berkeley, Calif. residents who had fought a housing project that they believed would bring mentally ill residents or recovering substance abusers (both protected as disabled under the Fair Housing Act) to their neighborhood. “It found this principle was so plain and obvious that it denied individual civil rights officials qualified immunity for” having investigated the citizens. That case [White v. Lee] would appear to stand for the proposition that the First Amendment provides robust protection for much speech that criticizes, opposes, and disparages others’ exercise of rights under the Fair Housing Act, and that the speech does not lose protection just because others regard it as retaliatory or discouraging to the exercise of rights.

More: Hans Bader, Scott Greenfield, and Eric Goldman, who got to the case before either of us.

Third Circuit: neighbors who criticized condo residents over emotional support dogs must face civil rights suit is a post from Overlawyered - Chronicling the high cost of our legal system

Free speech roundup is a post from Overlawyered - Chronicling the high cost of our legal system

Appeals court quashes search warrant aimed at gadfly Louisiana blogger is a post from Overlawyered - Chronicling the high cost of our legal system

Louisiana sheriff raids home in hopes of exposing identity of critical blogger is a post from Overlawyered - Chronicling the high cost of our legal system

September 30 roundup is a post from Overlawyered - Chronicling the high cost of our legal system

Free speech roundup is a post from Overlawyered - Chronicling the high cost of our legal system