Idaho Needs Good Faith Anti-SLAPP Legislation
In Idaho, free speech and civic engagement are under siege by a particularly abusive tactic known as the SLAPP lawsuit, or Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation. These lawsuits are designed not to win on merit but to intimidate, silence, and bankrupt their targets. Idaho currently has no protections against SLAPP-style litigation, leaving Idahoans vulnerable to being dragged through costly and time-consuming legal battles for simply speaking their minds.
Senator Brian Lenney (R-Nampa) has reintroduced anti-SLAPP legislation this legislative session. At first glance, it might seem like a step in the right direction. After all, who wouldn’t support protecting free speech? But Lenney’s track record and the history of politically motivated SLAPP lawsuits in Idaho reveal a far murkier picture—one where his motivations and political alliances deserve scrutiny.
SLAPP and Lawfare in Idaho: A Tool for Silence
SLAPP lawsuits have been a weapon of choice for those seeking to silence dissent and consolidate power. The Idaho Freedom Foundation (IFF) and its network of operatives have repeatedly used this tactic. Doyle Beck, a board member of the IFF, is one of the most prolific users of what many call "lawfare."
In 2016, Beck’s lawyer, Bryan Smith, filed a lawsuit against a group of Republicans in Idaho Falls for what Beck alleged was a “secret society” conspiring against him. The claim was absurd, but that wasn’t the point. The lawsuit cost the defendants tens of thousands of dollars and sent a clear message: challenge Beck’s control of the Bonneville County Republican Central Committee (BCRCC) at your own risk.
Then, Beck's and Smith’s legal playbook was aimed at me. In 2018, I wrote an article exposing Maria Nate’s use of her dead mother’s private emails in a statewide mailer paid for by Beck and Smith. This led to Ron Nate losing his election, and within weeks, Beck threatened my job and filed a lawsuit that sought to ruin me financially. How dare I tell the truth about the Nates — the couple he’s politically groomed and financed for years. He feigned ignorance about who wrote the article and launched a legal fishing expedition to punish me for daring to speak out. The stress of this lawsuit, which cost me over $10,000 in legal fees, was compounded by its chilling effect on my professional life and political work. I fought back, and Beck was forced to dismiss his abusive SLAPP-style legal action.
Even beyond these cases, the IFF network continues to use lawfare to silence critics. In October 2023, the Kootenai County Republican Central Committee (KCRCC) filed a defamation lawsuit against Dan Gookin, a Coeur d’Alene City Council member. The lawsuit, filed with Smith’s involvement, came after Gookin publicly criticized the KCRCC’s candidate vetting and rating system — a system everyone knew was a joke. This is yet another example of the same individuals and groups weaponizing the courts to suppress dissent and intimidate their opponents.
This is the essence of a SLAPP lawsuit: it’s not about justice. It’s about sending a message of fear to silence those who speak the truth to tyrants.
Lenney’s Anti-SLAPP Bill: A Questionable Effort
When Lenney first introduced anti-SLAPP legislation in 2024, it failed—for good reason. Many in the Senate didn’t take Lenney’s bill seriously because of who he chose to align himself with. Operatives like Dustin Hurst (Idaho Freedom PAC) and Greg Pruett (Idaho Dispatch and Idaho Second Amendment Alliance) became the faces of the bill. They falsely presented themselves as victims of SLAPP lawsuits in a case they helped orchestrate against me.
Their narrative conveniently omitted the fact that their ally, Chad Christensen, initiated a meritless lawsuit against me. After a long, drawn-out fight, he lost the lawsuit. But that was Bryan Smith’s strategy: to bleed me dry as punishment for telling the truth about their dirty deeds.
Rather than addressing the real issue of protecting Idahoans from SLAPP lawsuits, Lenney allowed his bill to become a vehicle for political vendettas.
Hurst and Pruett used what they called Sen. Lenney’s “Graf Anti-SLAPP Bill” to try and attack me online. This was a clear example of the bad faith surrounding the legislation. Lenney himself appeared on podcasts with Hurst and Pruett, amplifying their false narratives, and later, they created posts attacking my senate committee testimony. It was clear to many legislators that this was not an honest effort to protect free speech.
Even now, he chooses to mislead everyone about what happened to the bill last year, simply saying it was just “politics” that blocked it.
Lenney’s Conflict of Interest and the IFF Connection
Lenney’s ties to the Idaho Freedom Foundation and its network of donors raise serious questions about his motivations. The IFF-backed PACs and groups like Young Americans for Liberty (YAL) played a significant role in getting him elected by defeating Jeff Agenbroad, a moderate Republican who prioritized pragmatic governance over political theatrics. The same network that uses SLAPP lawsuits to silence critics now faces scrutiny. It’s hard to ignore the irony of Lenney’s sudden interest in curbing the very tool his allies have wielded for years.
Lenney would not have made it to the Senate without the IFF and YAL — the same groups Lenney is fighting with right now, showing his lack of conviction in favor of political opportunity.
This behavior further undermines Lenney’s credibility. His social media activity includes disparaging colleagues, spreading offensive and conspiratorial content, and aligning with far-right extremists. These actions have eroded trust within the legislature, making it difficult for him to build the coalition necessary to pass meaningful reform.
Idaho Deserves Honest Anti-SLAPP Reform
Idaho undoubtedly needs anti-SLAPP legislation. Protecting free speech and public participation from abusive lawsuits is essential. However, for such legislation to succeed, it must be rooted in transparency and good faith.
Sen. Lenney’s motives and actions raise serious concerns. His desperate need to pass a bill in a Senate that has little respect for him reeks of political opportunism. His history of atrocious social media posts—promoting racism, conspiracy theories, and misinformation—has left him isolated and distrusted. Lenney has aligned himself with some of the most dishonest political operatives, flipping his positions to suit his interests.
As someone who has been personally targeted by multiple SLAPP-style actions orchestrated by the same people who helped Lenney get elected, I see his efforts as profoundly disingenuous. Lenney’s lack of honesty about his role in enabling these abuses—and his public attempts to doxx me and my family—show that his anti-SLAPP push may be more about optics than substance.
Anti-SLAPP protections, while necessary, can be weaponized to shield bullies who exploit the system to protect their abusive behavior. Everyone knows how much Lenney loves bullying.
This bill may pass, and if it does, Idaho will finally have protections against SLAPP lawsuits.
Can this be done honestly? Idaho deserves leaders who act with integrity and prioritize the needs of their constituents over personal vendettas and political gamesmanship.
Your Support is Appreciated
If you love what we do, consider upgrading to a paid subscription for $6/month or $60/year. Your support keeps Political Potatoes running, helps us dig deeper, and allows us to keep exposing those trying to ruin Idaho. Every bit helps, and I truly appreciate it with a family to feed and constant threats for standing up for the truth.
Let's keep Idaho free from extremists – one hot political potato drop at a time.
About the Author
Gregory Graf is the creator of Political Potatoes and a lifelong conservative Republican. His articles often criticize the hypocrisy committed by far-right grifters who’ve taken control of the GOP. Graf is the CEO of Snake River Strategies, a communications and political consulting firm based in Eagle, Idaho. He and his family moved to Idaho Falls from Utah in 2013 and currently reside in Star.
Graf has been a frequent target of IFF’s attacks for standing up to corruption and confrontational tactics used by extremist groups in Idaho.
Disclaimer
The following is intended to convey an opinion on newsworthy events of public concern regarding public figures and/or public officials in the exercise of their official duties. No implications or inferences—beyond those explicitly stated in the preceding— are intended to be conveyed or endorsed by the Author. Wherever available, hyperlinks have been provided to allow readers to directly access any underlying assertions of fact upon which this opinion is based.
Follow Political Potatoes on Facebook and X (Twitter)
Greg said, “However, for such legislation to succeed, it must be rooted in transparency and good faith.”
I have also been to target of slap lawsuits up in North Idaho, but this time from people that didn’t like that I was an attorney for NIC, so the lawfare came from the liberal side, although the lawsuit was actually by Michael Gridley, a retired attorney, who publicly stated he wanted to keep us out of the public conversation. After thousands of dollars the entire case against me was dismissed on the merits, and there was some other settlement between other parties of which I have no knowledge.
I protest your quote above, because the merits of the legislation should stand on their own. Nobody complains about legislation from 20 years ago, or even five years ago, based on the perceived politics of the sponsoring legislator. If you don’t like this legislation, you need to show why the policy of it is bad according to its plain language. I suggest you talk to a couple of judges before you opine.
I support the legislation as written.