On the recordJuly 27, 2010
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Earlier this Congress, I introduced, together with Congressman Darrell Issa, H.R. 2765, to protect Americans' First Amendment rights against the threat posed by libel tourism, a new term in our vocabulary. The House passed that bill by voice vote under suspension of the rules. The 110th Congress had also passed that bill in this House as well. Last week, the Senate passed, by unanimous consent, an amended version of H.R. 2765, named the Securing the Protection of our Enduring and Established Constitutional Heritage Act, or SPEECH. We consider the Senate version today. Libel tourism is the name given to the practice of doing an end-run around the First Amendment by suing American authors and publishers for defamation in the courts of certain foreign countries with defamation laws that don't accord the same respect to free speech values as we do. Britain is a nation that particularly is a situs for these actions. While we generally share a proud common law legal tradition with the United Kingdom, it is also true that the United Kingdom has laws that disfavor speech critical of public officials and public figures, contrary to our own constitutional tradition. As a result, the United Kingdom has become the favorite destination for libel tourists. British defamation laws lack the constitutionally mandated speech- protective elements of U.S. law. For example, in contrast to U.S.…





