PUBLIC LAW 111–223—AUG. 10, 2010 

SECURING THE PROTECTION OF OUR 

ENDURING AND ESTABLISHED 

CONSTITUTIONAL HERITAGE ACT 


kgrant on DSKHRRP4G1PROD with PUBLAW
124 STAT. 2380 PUBLIC LAW 111–223—AUG. 10, 2010 

Public Law 111–223 

111th Congress 

An Act 

To amend title 28, United States Code, to prohibit recognition and enforcement 

of foreign defamation judgments and certain foreign judgments against the providers of interactive computer services. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Securing the Protection of our 

Enduring and Established Constitutional Heritage Act’’ or the 

‘‘SPEECH Act’’. 

SEC. 2. FINDINGS. 

Congress finds the following: 

(1) The freedom of speech and the press is enshrined in 

the first amendment to the Constitution, and is necessary to 

promote the vigorous dialogue necessary to shape public policy 

in a representative democracy. 

(2) Some persons are obstructing the free expression rights 

of United States authors and publishers, and in turn chilling 

the first amendment to the Constitution of the United States 

interest of the citizenry in receiving information on matters 

of importance, by seeking out foreign jurisdictions that do not 

provide the full extent of free-speech protections to authors 

and publishers that are available in the United States, and 

suing a United States author or publisher in that foreign jurisdiction. 

(3) These foreign defamation lawsuits not only suppress 

the free speech rights of the defendants to the suit, but inhibit 

other written speech that might otherwise have been written 

or published but for the fear of a foreign lawsuit. 

(4) The threat of the libel laws of some foreign countries 

is so dramatic that the United Nations Human Rights Committee examined the issue and indicated that in some instances 

the law of libel has served to discourage critical media reporting 

on matters of serious public interest, adversely affecting the 

ability of scholars and journalists to publish their work. The 

advent of the internet and the international distribution of 

foreign media also create the danger that one country’s unduly 

restrictive libel law will affect freedom of expression worldwide 

on matters of valid public interest. 

(5) Governments and courts of foreign countries scattered 

around the world have failed to curtail this practice of permitting libel lawsuits against United States persons within their 

28 USC 4101 

note. 

28 USC 1 note. 

Securing the 

Protection of our 

Enduring and 

Established 

Constitutional 

Heritage Act. 

Courts. 

Aug. 10, 2010 

[H.R. 2765] 


kgrant on DSKHRRP4G1PROD with PUBLAW
PUBLIC LAW 111–223—AUG. 10, 2010 124 STAT. 2381 

courts, and foreign libel judgments inconsistent with United 

States first amendment protections are increasingly common. 

SEC. 3. RECOGNITION OF FOREIGN DEFAMATION JUDGMENTS. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—Part VI of title 28, United States Code, is 

amended by adding at the end the following: 

‘‘CHAPTER 181—FOREIGN JUDGMENTS 

‘‘Sec. 

‘‘4101. Definitions. 

‘‘4102. Recognition of foreign defamation judgments. 

‘‘4103. Removal. 

‘‘4104. Declaratory judgments. 

‘‘4105. Attorney’s fees. 

‘‘§ 4101. Definitions 

‘‘In this chapter: 

‘‘(1) DEFAMATION.—The term ‘defamation’ means any action 

or other proceeding for defamation, libel, slander, or similar 

claim alleging that forms of speech are false, have caused 

damage to reputation or emotional distress, have presented 

any person in a false light, or have resulted in criticism, dishonor, or condemnation of any person. 

‘‘(2) DOMESTIC COURT.—The term ‘domestic court’ means 

a Federal court or a court of any State. 

‘‘(3) FOREIGN COURT.—The term ‘foreign court’ means a 

court, administrative body, or other tribunal of a foreign 

country. 

‘‘(4) FOREIGN JUDGMENT.—The term ‘foreign judgment’ 

means a final judgment rendered by a foreign court. 

‘‘(5) STATE.—The term ‘State’ means each of the several 

States, the District of Columbia, and any commonwealth, territory, or possession of the United States. 

‘‘(6) UNITED STATES PERSON.—The term ‘United States person’ means— 

‘‘(A) a United States citizen; 

‘‘(B) an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence to the United States; 

‘‘(C) an alien lawfully residing in the United States 

at the time that the speech that is the subject of the 

foreign defamation action was researched, prepared, or 

disseminated; or 

‘‘(D) a business entity incorporated in, or with its primary location or place of operation in, the United States. 

‘‘§ 4102. Recognition of foreign defamation judgments 

‘‘(a) FIRST AMENDMENT CONSIDERATIONS.— 

‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any other provision of 

Federal or State law, a domestic court shall not recognize 

or enforce a foreign judgment for defamation unless the 

domestic court determines that— 

‘‘(A) the defamation law applied in the foreign court’s 

adjudication provided at least as much protection for 

freedom of speech and press in that case as would be 

provided by the first amendment to the Constitution of 

the United States and by the constitution and law of the 

State in which the domestic court is located; or 


kgrant on DSKHRRP4G1PROD with PUBLAW
124 STAT. 2382 PUBLIC LAW 111–223—AUG. 10, 2010 

‘‘(B) even if the defamation law applied in the foreign 

court’s adjudication did not provide as much protection 

for freedom of speech and press as the first amendment 

to the Constitution of the United States and the constitution and law of the State, the party opposing recognition 

or enforcement of that foreign judgment would have been 

found liable for defamation by a domestic court applying 

the first amendment to the Constitution of the United 

States and the constitution and law of the State in which 

the domestic court is located. 

‘‘(2) BURDEN OF ESTABLISHING APPLICATION OF DEFAMATION

LAWS.—The party seeking recognition or enforcement of the 

foreign judgment shall bear the burden of making the showings 

required under subparagraph (A) or (B). 

‘‘(b) JURISDICTIONAL CONSIDERATIONS.— 

‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any other provision of 

Federal or State law, a domestic court shall not recognize 

or enforce a foreign judgment for defamation unless the 

domestic court determines that the exercise of personal jurisdiction by the foreign court comported with the due process 

requirements that are imposed on domestic courts by the Constitution of the United States. 

‘‘(2) BURDEN OF ESTABLISHING EXERCISE OF JURISDICTION.— 

The party seeking recognition or enforcement of the foreign 

judgment shall bear the burden of making the showing that 

the foreign court’s exercise of personal jurisdiction comported 

with the due process requirements that are imposed on domestic 

courts by the Constitution of the United States. 

‘‘(c) JUDGMENT AGAINST PROVIDER OF INTERACTIVE COMPUTER

SERVICE.— 

‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any other provision of 

Federal or State law, a domestic court shall not recognize 

or enforce a foreign judgment for defamation against the provider of an interactive computer service, as defined in section 

230 of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 230) unless 

the domestic court determines that the judgment would be 

consistent with section 230 if the information that is the subject 

of such judgment had been provided in the United States. 

‘‘(2) BURDEN OF ESTABLISHING CONSISTENCY OF JUDGMENT.—The party seeking recognition or enforcement of the 

foreign judgment shall bear the burden of establishing that 

the judgment is consistent with section 230. 

‘‘(d) APPEARANCES NOT A BAR.—An appearance by a party 

in a foreign court rendering a foreign judgment to which this 

section applies shall not deprive such party of the right to oppose 

the recognition or enforcement of the judgment under this section, 

or represent a waiver of any jurisdictional claims. 

‘‘(e) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in this section shall 

be construed to— 

‘‘(1) affect the enforceability of any foreign judgment other 

than a foreign judgment for defamation; or 

‘‘(2) limit the applicability of section 230 of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 230) to causes of action for defamation. 


kgrant on DSKHRRP4G1PROD with PUBLAW
PUBLIC LAW 111–223—AUG. 10, 2010 124 STAT. 2383 

‘‘§ 4103. Removal 

‘‘In addition to removal allowed under section 1441, any action 

brought in a State domestic court to enforce a foreign judgment 

for defamation in which— 

‘‘(1) any plaintiff is a citizen of a State different from 

any defendant; 

‘‘(2) any plaintiff is a foreign state or a citizen or subject 

of a foreign state and any defendant is a citizen of a State; 

or 

‘‘(3) any plaintiff is a citizen of a State and any defendant 

is a foreign state or citizen or subject of a foreign state, 

may be removed by any defendant to the district court of the 

United States for the district and division embracing the place 

where such action is pending without regard to the amount in 

controversy between the parties. 

‘‘§ 4104. Declaratory judgments 

‘‘(a) CAUSE OF ACTION.— 

‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Any United States person against whom 

a foreign judgment is entered on the basis of the content 

of any writing, utterance, or other speech by that person that 

has been published, may bring an action in district court, 

under section 2201(a), for a declaration that the foreign judgment is repugnant to the Constitution or laws of the United 

States. For the purposes of this paragraph, a judgment is 

repugnant to the Constitution or laws of the United States 

if it would not be enforceable under section 4102 (a), (b), or 

(c). 

‘‘(2) BURDEN OF ESTABLISHING UNENFORCEABILITY OF JUDGMENT.—The party bringing an action under paragraph (1) shall 

bear the burden of establishing that the foreign judgment would 

not be enforceable under section 4102 (a), (b), or (c). 

‘‘(b) NATIONWIDE SERVICE OF PROCESS.—Where an action under 

this section is brought in a district court of the United States, 

process may be served in the judicial district where the case is 

brought or any other judicial district of the United States where 

the defendant may be found, resides, has an agent, or transacts 

business. 

‘‘§ 4105. Attorneys’ fees 

‘‘In any action brought in a domestic court to enforce a foreign 

judgment for defamation, including any such action removed from 

State court to Federal court, the domestic court shall, absent exceptional circumstances, allow the party opposing recognition or 

enforcement of the judgment a reasonable attorney’s fee if such 

party prevails in the action on a ground specified in section 4102 

(a), (b), or (c).’’. 

(b) SENSE OF CONGRESS.—It is the Sense of the Congress that 

for the purpose of pleading a cause of action for a declaratory 

judgment, a foreign judgment for defamation or any similar offense 

as described under chapter 181 of title 28, United States Code, 

(as added by this Act) shall constitute a case of actual controversy 

under section 2201(a) of title 28, United States Code. 


kgrant on DSKHRRP4G1PROD with PUBLAW
124 STAT. 2384 PUBLIC LAW 111–223—AUG. 10, 2010 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.R. 2765: 

HOUSE REPORTS: No. 111–154 (Comm. on the Judiciary). 

SENATE REPORTS: No. 111–224 (Comm. on the Judiciary). 

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD: 

Vol. 155 (2009): June 15, considered and passed House. 

Vol. 156 (2010): July 19, considered and passed Senate, amended. 

July 27, House concurred in Senate amendment. 

Æ 

(c) TECHNICAL AND CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—The table of 

chapters for part VI of title 28, United States Code, is amended 

by adding at the end the following: 

‘‘181. Foreign judgments ...................................................................................4101.’’. 

Approved August 10, 2010. 


kgrant on DSKHRRP4G1PROD with PUBLAW