Securing the Protection of our Enduring and Established Constitutional Heritage Act
PL 111-223 (H.R.2765), enacted 08/10/2010

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 pro-
viders 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 juris-
diction. 
(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 Com-
mittee 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 permit-
ting 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] 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
07:50 Dec 07, 2012
Jkt 089194
PO 00003
Frm 00123
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
G:\GSDD\STATUTES\2010\PT3\89194PT3.001
89194PT3
dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with $$_JOB
124 STAT. 2381 
PUBLIC LAW 111–223—AUG. 10, 2010 
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, dis-
honor, 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, terri-
tory, or possession of the United States. 
‘‘(6) UNITED STATES PERSON.—The term ‘United States per-
son’ means— 
‘‘(A) a United States citizen; 
‘‘(B) an alien lawfully admitted for permanent resi-
dence 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 pri-
mary 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 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
07:50 Dec 07, 2012
Jkt 089194
PO 00003
Frm 00124
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
G:\GSDD\STATUTES\2010\PT3\89194PT3.001
89194PT3
dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with $$_JOB
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 constitu-
tion 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 jurisdic-
tion by the foreign court comported with the due process 
requirements that are imposed on domestic courts by the Con-
stitution 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 pro-
vider 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
JUDG-
MENT.—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 Communica-
tions Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 230) to causes of action for defama-
tion. 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
07:50 Dec 07, 2012
Jkt 089194
PO 00003
Frm 00125
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
G:\GSDD\STATUTES\2010\PT3\89194PT3.001
89194PT3
dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with $$_JOB
124 STAT. 2383 
PUBLIC LAW 111–223—AUG. 10, 2010 
‘‘§ 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 judg-
ment 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 JUDG-
MENT.—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 excep-
tional 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. 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
07:50 Dec 07, 2012
Jkt 089194
PO 00003
Frm 00126
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
G:\GSDD\STATUTES\2010\PT3\89194PT3.001
89194PT3
dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with $$_JOB
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. 
(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. 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
07:50 Dec 07, 2012
Jkt 089194
PO 00003
Frm 00127
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6580
G:\GSDD\STATUTES\2010\PT3\89194PT3.001
89194PT3
dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with $$_JOB