Poppy Press

Anti-SLAPP laws are meant to protect individuals from Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPP) and prohibit the weaponization of the law to stifle free speech.

On February 5, 2025, undergraduate and graduate Students for Justice in Palestine held a “wake-up call” protest outside the home of Regent Jonathan “Jay” Sures, who is a prominent supporter of the UC’s investments in weapons manufacturers. During the protest, students chanted and banged on drums early in the morning, calling out Sures’ complicity in the genocide of Palestinians in Gaza.

Following the protest, Sures singled out graduate student Dylan Kupsh, present at the action, and filed a restraining order against him. In Sures’ request for a restraining order, he submitted a declaration that characterized the protest as an “angry mob” and a “gang,” quoting signs held up by protesters demanding divestment from genocide as proof of “life-threatening behavior.” Sures also names UCPD as the entity which erroneously identified the graduate student to him as a “ring leader.”

In response to the claims presented by Sures, the student filed an anti-SLAPP motion, arguing that Sures’ request violated California’s laws prohibiting the weaponization of law to stifle free speech. The motion also asserts that Sures “champions a UC-wide policy to end political speech about Palestine he does not like” and that the wake-up call protest Sures refers to was both peaceful and non-violent.

Today, Judge Kimberly Repecka heard arguments on the anti-SLAPP motion and ruled in favor of the graduate student, agreeing that Sures’ restraining order was an attempt at suppressing the student’s First Amendment rights. This means that the temporary restraining order will not be fulfilled, and the student can now seek compensation from Sures to pay his legal fees.

During the two-hour hearing, Sures’ attorneys attempted to claim that a banner depicting pigs wearing police hats instead showed pigs wearing yarmulkes. They used this as a pretext to compare protesters to the KKK, saying the n-word multiple times. Sures’ attorneys are white.

The judge rejected this bizarre claim and explained the history of analogizing police to pigs in many protest movements. Sures’ legal team was not made up of his personal attorneys, but was instead composed of lawyers who represent the University of California.

While Judge Repecka did express disapproval of the protesters’ conduct, she also asserted that the law is clear on the conditions required to grant a restraining order and ultimately dismissed a majority of Sures’ alleged “evidence” against Kupsh. Much of said evidence included social media posts that were not authored by the student.

In a statement to Poppy Press, attorney Thomas Harvey commented:

“Today the Court recognized that rich and powerful people like Jay Sures can’t bully anti-genocide protesters into silence. But this is about more than Jay Sures. UCLA and the entire UC system has to learn that the movement to end the genocide in Palestine won’t be silenced either. No matter how many arrests, student conduct meetings, or lawsuits they file, there are lawyers like Ben Gharagozli, Mark Kleiman, and myself, among many others, who will fight for them.”