<p>The Illinois Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that a defamation lawsuit linked to Chicago Sun-Times coverage of a Trump Tower property tax appeal should proceed against the newspaper because it didn’t prove that a former state official it reported on had filed his civil complaint in order “to silence citizen participation.”</p><p>In a 6-0 decision with one justice taking no part, the state’s top court ruled the suit filed by ex-Illinois Property Tax Appeal Board executive director Mauro Glorioso wasn’t lodged against the Sun-Times “solely based on defendant’s exercise of political rights.”</p><p>Glorioso is suing the newspaper over a 2020 article about an anonymous complaint that accused him of improperly pushing for a property tax break on Donald Trump’s namesake riverfront tower.</p><p>The state Supreme Court didn’t rule on Glorioso’s defamation claim against the newspaper, but rather on the Sun-Times’ argument that his lawsuit should have been dismissed under the Illinois Citizen Participation Act.</p><p>That state law is intended to empower courts to swiftly throw out any meritless, retaliatory lawsuit known as a “Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation" — or SLAPP — which “chills and diminishes citizen participation in government” through the threat of expensive litigation, the 2007 legislation reads.</p><p>Lower courts ruled that Glorioso’s suit was not a SLAPP because it was not filed solely on the basis of the Sun-Times exercise of First Amendment rights — and that the newspaper did not prove that the suit was retaliatory and meritless.</p><p>Illinois Supreme Court Justice David Overstreet affirmed in <a class="Link" href="https://ilcourtsaudio.blob.core.windows.net/antilles-resources/resources/0f9ce3b1-4415-4fb7-b102-17e0f5ec8d95/Glorioso%20v.%20Sun-Times%20Media%20Holdings,%20LLC,%202024%20IL%20130137.pdf" target="_blank" >the unanimous opinion</a> that Glorioso’s suit “is not a SLAPP,” ruling that the Citizen Participation Act “specifically protects government participation and does not encompass all media reports on matters of public concern.”</p><p>The justices remanded the case to proceed in circuit court.</p><div class="Enhancement" data-align-floatRight>
<div class="Enhancement-item" data-crop="">
<figure class="Figure"><a class="AnchorLink" id="image-ca0000" name="image-ca0000"></a>
<picture data-crop="medium">
<source type="image/webp" width="490"
height="275"
data-srcset="https://cst.brightspotcdn.com/dims4/default/25691db/2147483647/strip/true/crop/800×449+0+350/resize/490×275!/format/webp/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fchorus-production-cst-web.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2Faa%2F8e%2Fee57c5acaf855c8beb42ddb17137%2Fglorioso.png 1x,https://cst.brightspotcdn.com/dims4/default/de9ec02/2147483647/strip/true/crop/800×449+0+350/resize/980×550!/format/webp/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fchorus-production-cst-web.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2Faa%2F8e%2Fee57c5acaf855c8beb42ddb17137%2Fglorioso.png 2x" data-lazy-load="true" srcset=""
/>
<source width="490"
height="275"
data-srcset="https://cst.brightspotcdn.com/dims4/default/20704db/2147483647/strip/true/crop/800×449+0+350/resize/490×275!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fchorus-production-cst-web.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2Faa%2F8e%2Fee57c5acaf855c8beb42ddb17137%2Fglorioso.png" data-lazy-load="true" srcset=""
/>
<img class="Image" alt="Mauro Glorioso." srcset="https://cst.brightspotcdn.com/dims4/default/20704db/2147483647/strip/true/crop/800×449+0+350/resize/490×275!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fchorus-production-cst-web.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2Faa%2F8e%2Fee57c5acaf855c8beb42ddb17137%2Fglorioso.png 1x,https://cst.brightspotcdn.com/dims4/default/fd0929c/2147483647/strip/true/crop/800×449+0+350/resize/980×550!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fchorus-production-cst-web.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2Faa%2F8e%2Fee57c5acaf855c8beb42ddb17137%2Fglorioso.png 2x" width="490" height="275"
data-src="https://cst.brightspotcdn.com/dims4/default/20704db/2147483647/strip/true/crop/800×449+0+350/resize/490×275!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fchorus-production-cst-web.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2Faa%2F8e%2Fee57c5acaf855c8beb42ddb17137%2Fglorioso.png" data-lazy-load="true" src=""
>
</picture>
<div class="Figure-content"><figcaption class="Figure-caption"><p>Mauro Glorioso.</p></figcaption><span class="line"></span><div class="Figure-credit"><p>Illinois Property Tax Appeal Board</p></div></div>
</figure>
</div>
</div><p>The Sun-Times has stood behind the accuracy of <a class="Link" href="https://chicago.suntimes.com/2020/2/7/21126855/donald-trump-tower-chicago-property-tax-appeal-investigation" target="_blank" >investigative reporter Tim Novak’s story</a>, which was published in February 2020.</p><p>Novak reported that an anonymous complaint prompted investigations by the state’s executive inspector general’s office as well as Democratic Gov. JB Pritzker’s office into whether Glorioso, a Republican attorney, had pressured staff to give Trump a $1 million property tax refund on Trump Tower. </p><p>Pritzker previously appointed Glorioso executive director of the Illinois Property Tax Appeal Board, which can overrule county officials’ decisions on property tax assessments, potentially reducing owners’ tax bills.</p><p>During the investigation by the Illinois Office of Executive Inspector General, Pritzker <a class="Link" href="https://chicago.suntimes.com/2020/10/9/21509933/trump-tower-chicago-property-tax-dispute-pritzker-mauro-glorioso-illinois-property-tax-appeal-board" target="_blank" >removed Glorioso from his position</a> in October 2020, citing concerns over a backlog of cases.</p><p>Glorioso then sued Novak and the Sun-Times in January 2021 for allegedly misrepresenting the nature of the complaint about how the Trump case was handled.</p><p>The OEIG later deemed “unfounded” the anonymous complaint against Glorioso — but the watchdog agency <a class="Link" href="https://chicago.suntimes.com/2021/9/24/22692526/mauro-glorioso-donald-trump-illinois-property-tax-appeal-board-executive-inspector-general" target="_blank" >still ruled in September 2021 that Glorioso violated state law and policy</a> by deleting files and emails related to Trump’s tax appeal.</p><p>The deletions came days after the Sun-Times asked for such records under the Illinois Freedom of Information Act, the state law that provides public access to government records.</p><p>The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press had urged justices to dismiss Glorioso’s lawsuit and reinforce anti-SLAPP precedent.</p><p>“Time and again, these laws have protected journalists and news organizations from lawsuits seeking to silence their reporting. Without the full protections of laws like the [Citizen Participation Act], journalists and news organizations may avoid important stories out of fear of being hit with a financially burdensome or even ruinous SLAPP,” committee leaders said in a statement.</p><p>But the state Supreme Court noted the law doesn’t make “any mention of news media or the freedom of the press.</p><p>“This is not to minimize or understate the importance of the press and other news media in our democracy. Our jurisprudence is replete with privileges and other protections designed to protect these concerns, many of which remain at issue in this lawsuit,” Overstreet wrote. “We are simply holding that the Act specifically protects government participation and does not encompass all media reports on matters of public concern as advocated by defendants.”</p><p>Reacting to the court’s ruling, Damon Dunn, the Sun-Times lawyer in the case, said, "[A]t a time when the First Amendment is under siege, it is disappointing that the court declined to revisit its prior opinion and protect speech on matters of public concern under our Illinois statute, particularly when other states recently took steps to ensure their SLAPP laws protect news reports on the conduct of government officials.</p><p>"The newspaper looks forward to proving this case is meritless under the constitutional protections for the press that the Court recognizes are still at issue," Dunn added, "and getting to the bottom of why the Trump Tower tax appeal was handled the way it was." </p><p>Phillip Zisook, an attorney for Glorioso, lauded the court’s decision, saying Glorioso appreciated its "thorough analysis of the Illinois Citizen Participation Act… and finding that the Defendants’ news articles did not constitute acts in furtherance of government participation protected by the Act." </p><p></p>
