Affirmative defense for political targeting

(a) In general It shall be an affirmative defense to any covered enforcement claim that the claim brought against the applicable covered person was substantially motivated by the protected speech or participation of the covered person. (b) Procedures If, at any time after the Government initiates a covered enforcement claim, a covered person presents substantial evidence that protected speech or participation is or was a motivating factor in the covered enforcement claim, including the underlying investigation or other pre-enforcement activities— (1) the court— (A) shall order expedited discovery reasonably related to the alleged motivations of the Government for pursuing the covered enforcement claim; and (B) may, if the Attorney General files an affidavit under oath that any materials responsive to a discovery request under subparagraph (A) are privileged, review in camera and ex parte such materials; and (2) the Government shall bear the burden of proving by clear and convincing evidence that— (A) legitimate grounds unrelated to protected speech or participation by the covered person justify the covered enforcement claim; and (B) the covered enforcement claim was not substantially motivated by the protected speech or participation of the covered person. (c) Relief If the Government does not meet the burden of proof under subsection (b)(2), the court shall dismiss the covered enforcement claim or otherwise award appropriate relief to ensure that no covered enforcement claim substantially motivated by protected speech or participation is able to proceed.