GOP lawmaker behind Florida defamation bill says critics are wrong: 'Nothing in this bill' hurts conservatives

The Republican Florida lawmaker sponsoring a hotly debated defamation bill is pushing back against right-leaning critics who claim the legislation will lead to doom for conservative media in the Sunshine State.

"There's been a lot of articles that have come out that keep saying this lowers the standard or makes it easier to sue or allows for more types of lawsuits. It does not," Rep. Alex Andrade of Pensacola told Fox News Digital the interview.

Andrade has been on the receiving end of attacks in recent weeks for championing HB 757, the bill detractors allege will lower the standard for defamation in an effort to target liberal media outlets, something Andrade derides as a "false premise" and that it was "never the intent."

"The intent is to allow these cases to be resolved much faster and seek the most judicious, efficient resolution for these cases possible and to protect valid voices and opinions," Andrade says.

Fox News Digital spoke with Andrade before HB 757 was officially halted by Florida Senate President Kathleen Passidomo, who refused to hear the bill, though Andrade remains proud of the legislation and doesn't rule out filing it again in the future. 

GOP-BACKED DEFAMATION BILL IN FLORIDA WILL ‘DESTROY CONSERVATIVE MEDIA,’ RADIO HOST WARNS

If passed, HB 757 would speed up the timeline of historically lengthy defamation lawsuits, fast-tracking motions in court "within 60 days" and getting a case in front of a judge.

"[This bill will] allow folks who are plaintiffs who have a case with merit the opportunity to at least clear their name and not have to wait three years to get to a jury trial to clear their name," Andrade says. "On the flip side, if there's a defendant who's been wrongfully sued with a frivolous defamation lawsuit, I want them to have an opportunity to get out of it as quickly as possible."

One of the most vocal critics, political consultant and Fox News Radio affiliate host Trey Radel, argued the bill will put his livelihood and countless other media conservatives in jeopardy. Andrade responds by saying there's "nothing in this bill that would change his life at all."

RHODE ISLAND TEACHER WILL SOUND ALARM ON DHS-FUNDED ‘MEDIA LITERACY’ PROGRAM SHE SAYS WILL ‘INDOCTRINATE CHILDREN’

"In the unfortunate circumstance he was sued at some point for defamation, this bill would give him the tools and the ability to get out of it much faster and much cheaper than what he'd have to face right now," Andrade insists. 

One of the major points of opposition to the bill is declaring a "rebuttable presumption" against any publisher who uses anonymous sources to make provably false statements, saying they "acted with actual malice." 

Andrade forcibly pushed back on the notion that cracking down on inaccurate anonymous sources would have any sort of chilling effect on journalism in Florida, arguing that if journalists simply do their "due diligence" in verifying the facts, this bill should not concern them. 

"If you apply that language in the bill to any case of defamation that's been brought, any lawsuit of defamation that's been brought over the past 60 years since New York Times v. Sullivan was passed, it would not change the result of a single case," Andrade said. "Actual malice has always been found in that context because that action of publishing a false statement that causes harm without doing any due diligence has always been found to satisfy the actual malice standard. If you want to avoid liability, all you have to do is show the due diligence you've engaged in to verify that source's statement. And then that presumption is overcome."

Another section of the bill cracks down on the use of artificial intelligence for "false light." Andrade dismissed any concerns that satire would be targeted as a result because the language of the bill specifically says there must be "intent" to publish something that is false. 

US NEWS & WORLD REPORT FIGHTS SUBPOENAS FROM SAN FRANCISCO CITY ATTORNEY AS PART OF FIRST AMENDMENT LAWSUIT

Perhaps the biggest complaint alleged by the bill's critics, however, is that defamation lawsuits can be brought in "any county" in Florida, insisting that would lead to liberals suing conservatives in blue counties where a liberal judge would rule against the defendant, something that would cripple conservative media in the state. 

Andrade concedes the "very first version" of the bill had the "any county" language but it has since been revised to state that the location where a lawsuit is brought must be where a plaintiff "reasonably suffered damages," something they would have to prove in court. And the bill deters "forum shopping" with the clause that requires the plaintiff and the plantiff's attorney to pay the legal fees of the defendant if it's determined there is "no reasonable connection" to the county they chose. 

Cutting through the noise surrounding HB 757, Andrade assures opponents he would never support a bill that would end up hurting conservative media outlets in Florida. If you care about "truth and justice," he said, support the bill.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

"I am confident that this bill will not open up any opportunities for new lawsuits that cannot and are not brought right now. And it will also allow for good plaintiffs and good defendants the ability to at least resolve the important aspects of their case in a much faster period of time without jeopardizing anybody's rights," Andrade says. "Like, if you want to go pursue a three-year trial, go with God. But if you want to clear your name or if you want to try and clarify for everybody that it's a frivolous lawsuit, the summary judgment motion would allow folks to really fully clarify for both parties what they're dealing with in their case."