> We should instead make wasting the other party's time cost money.
How do you prove that, though?
How do you prove that, though?
I think limits should be placed even on this, as poorer people are more likely to have a bad case as a plaintiff as they can only afford to personally represent themselves.
For those representing themselves it should start coming up a bit before they'd be declared a vexatious litigant. For those represented by an attorney, it should probably be the attorney paying the fee for wasting the other party's time and money.
That is a bad argument. Poor people are unable to afford a lawyer in the first place for this (or they do not know they can sue over this-the poor tend to be poor in more ways than just money). They will act out in other ways. These lawsuits are primarily the domain of the rich or the middle class very vengeful.
Right now, the fact that judges have not already implemented anti-SLAPP as a rule instead of keeping these frivolous avenues to sue is another sign of corruption in the judiciary that keeps lawyers employed.