House debates anti‑SLAPP bill and rejects multiple amendments; ordered to third reading

House Bill 223, titled “preventing strategic lawsuits against public participation,” dominated a lengthy floor debate on Feb. 11 as members considered how to balance protections for petition and speech with plaintiffs’ access to redress for reputational harms. After several proposed changes failed, the House ordered the bill to be read a third time.

Representative Chesty moved amendments on multiple points, arguing the bill as drafted was “overbroad and over aggressive” and that certain provisions would improperly reach beyond Wyoming or undermine local government authority. “This bill, as I said yesterday during debate, I think is a problematic bill. It has a good intent. And there's parts of it I do like. But I think it's overbroad and over aggressive in a lot of ways,” Representative Chesty told colleagues.

Major areas of floor debate

- Extraterritorial application: Representative Chesty sought to remove sections that would allow Wyoming law to be used to relitigate suits filed and decided elsewhere. Chesty said the language risked applying Wyoming law to claims and litigants that lacked sufficient contacts with the state. The House rejected that amendment.

- Local government/time-place-manner protections: One amendment aimed to preserve municipalities’ ability to impose…