bill asserts that claiming someone has discriminated against another person or group because of their identity will be considered “defamation per se” — meaning the accuser could find themselves facing costly legal bills for simply expressing their opinion.The bill does not appear to address what happens if the alleged discrimination is a matter of fact or public record — rather, just making an accusation of discriminatory behavior appears to be enough to land them in trouble legally.Under the bill:Under current defamation and libel laws, a subject must prove that a speaker or journalist acted with “actual malice.”This typically makes it harder for public figures, such as celebrities, to sue for defamation or libel, as they must prove the person they are suing either knew the information wasn’t true or demonstrated “reckless disregard” for its falsity.But now those in the public eye who find themselves accused of discrimination have nothing to fear — because the bill redefines what constitutes a “public figure.”The bill also eliminates the requirement that a person accused of discrimination prove their accuser acted with “actual malice” in cases where “the allegation does not relate to the reason for his or her public status.”Essentially, it means that it’s more likely that anyone making an accusation alleging discrimination will be found guilty and fined when the case goes to court.As reported by The New Republic, a person may not be considered a “public figure,” even in a limited context, if their fame or notoriety stems from:For example, if the bill becomes law, a podcaster who rants about gay marriage and calls LGBTQ people “diseased,” “perverse,” or makes other disparaging remarks could sue any person or entity
