Defamation and Online Harassment Laws in Illinois

Defamation in Illinois is a common-law claim developed by the courts and limited by the First Amendment. A plaintiff generally must show a false statement about them, an unprivileged publication of it to a third party, fault amounting to at least negligence, and resulting damage. The Slander and Libel Act adds a few statutory rules, and the Uniform Single Publication Act allows only one claim for damages per publication, such as one edition of a newspaper or one broadcast.

Sources1Solaia Technology, LLC v. Specialty Publishing Co., 221 Ill. 2d 558 (2006)2Digital Media Law Project, Illinois Defamation Law3Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc., 418 U.S. 323 (1974)4740 ILCS 145/1 (Slander and Libel Act)5740 ILCS 165/1 (Uniform Single Publication Act)

The Criminal Code of 1961 once had a criminal defamation offense aimed at statements made with intent to defame that tended to provoke a breach of the peace; in People v. Heinrich (1984) the Illinois Supreme Court reversed a ruling that had struck it down, in a case about a private person. The current Criminal Code of 2012 has no criminal defamation article. One narrow criminal law remains: the Derogatory Statements About Banks Act makes it a Class A misdemeanor to willfully and maliciously spread statements or rumors about the finances of a bank, trust company or savings and loan association with intent to affect its solvency or financial standing, and truth is a complete defense.

Sources6People v. Heinrich, 104 Ill. 2d 137 (1984)7Criminal Code of 2012 (720 ILCS 5), list of articles8720 ILCS 300/1 (Derogatory Statements About Banks Act)

Lawsuits for libel, slander or publication of matter that violates the right of privacy must be filed within one year after the claim accrues. Under the single publication rule, one publication or broadcast supports only one claim for damages, and that claim covers harm suffered in every jurisdiction.

Sources9735 ILCS 5/13-2015740 ILCS 165/1

Related guide: Statute of limitations for defamation in every state

Illinois recognizes five categories of defamation per se, where harm to reputation is presumed: statements that someone committed a crime, has a loathsome communicable disease, cannot perform or lacks integrity in their job, lacks ability or is otherwise harmed in their profession, or committed adultery or fornication. By statute, falsely accusing someone of swearing falsely is also actionable. Under the innocent construction rule, a statement is not defamatory per se if, read in context, it can reasonably be understood in an innocent way or as referring to someone else.

Sources1Solaia Technology, LLC v. Specialty Publishing Co., 221 Ill. 2d 558 (2006)10Bryson v. News America Publications, Inc., 174 Ill. 2d 77 (1996)4740 ILCS 145/111740 ILCS 145/2

Related guide: What defamation per se means

The Citizen Participation Act covers motions to dispose of claims based on acts in furtherance of the rights of petition, speech, association, participation in government and freedom of the press. A hearing and decision must take place within 90 days after notice of the motion, discovery is generally suspended, the court must dismiss the claim unless the plaintiff shows by clear and convincing evidence that the defendant's acts are not protected, and a defendant who wins the motion is awarded reasonable attorney fees and costs. In Sandholm v. Kuecker (2012) the Illinois Supreme Court limited the Act to meritless, retaliatory suits; a 2025 amendment, which applies only to actions filed on or after January 1, 2026, says the Act applies regardless of the plaintiff's motives and adds a broader stay of proceedings.

Sources12735 ILCS 110/1513735 ILCS 110/1714735 ILCS 110/2015735 ILCS 110/2516735 ILCS 110/3217Sandholm v. Kuecker, 2012 IL 11144318Public Act 104-0431 (SB 1181)

Related guide: Anti-SLAPP laws by state

The Illinois Constitution makes truth, published with good motives and for justifiable ends, a sufficient defense in libel cases. Statements that cannot reasonably be read as stating actual facts are protected by the First Amendment, and the Illinois Supreme Court has held that fair and accurate reports of official proceedings, including court filings, stay privileged even when actual malice is alleged. Public officials and public figures must prove actual malice, meaning knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard for the truth, while private plaintiffs must show at least negligence.

Sources19Ill. Const. art. I, § 410Bryson v. News America Publications, Inc., 174 Ill. 2d 77 (1996)1Solaia Technology, LLC v. Specialty Publishing Co., 221 Ill. 2d 558 (2006)20New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964)3Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc., 418 U.S. 323 (1974)2Digital Media Law Project, Illinois Defamation Law (citing Troman v. Wood, 62 Ill. 2d 184 (1975))

Under 720 ILCS 5/12-7.5, cyberstalking includes a course of electronic communication aimed at a specific person that the offender knows or should know would make a reasonable person fear for their safety or suffer emotional distress. It also covers harassing someone electronically on at least two occasions combined with threats or solicitation of harm, secretly installing spyware to harass someone combined with threats, and keeping a harassing website or webpage up for at least 24 hours that threatens or solicits harm. Cyberstalking is a Class 4 felony, and a second or later conviction is a Class 3 felony.

Source21720 ILCS 5/12-7.5

Related guide: Cyberstalking laws explained

Harassment through electronic communications, under 720 ILCS 5/26.5-3, includes using electronic communication to make obscene comments meant to offend, to interrupt or block someone's phone or online service with intent to harass, to threaten injury to a person, their family or household members or their property, or, for someone 16 or older, to harass a child under 13. Internet service and hosting providers are not liable for messages sent by others, except for willful and wanton misconduct.

Source22720 ILCS 5/26.5-3

Related guide: Online harassment laws explained

The Civil Liability for Doxing Act, in effect since January 1, 2024, lets a person sue someone who intentionally publishes their personally identifiable information without consent, intending it to be used to harm or harass them and knowing or recklessly disregarding that they are reasonably likely to suffer death, bodily injury or stalking. The publication must cause significant economic injury or emotional distress, fear of serious injury or death, or a substantial life disruption. Victims can recover damages and reasonable attorney fees, and reports to law enforcement, reports of unlawful conduct and constitutionally protected activity are excluded.

Sources23740 ILCS 195/1024740 ILCS 195/15

Related guide: Is doxxing illegal?

Intentionally sharing an identifiable sexual image of another person, obtained in circumstances where a reasonable person would understand it was to stay private, when the sender knows or should have known the person did not consent, is a Class 4 felony under 720 ILCS 5/11-23.5. Separately, the Civil Remedies for Nonconsensual Dissemination of Private Sexual Images Act lets the person shown sue an adult who shares or threatens to share a private or intentionally digitally altered sexual image without consent, and disclosing that an image was digitally altered is not a defense.

Sources25720 ILCS 5/11-23.526740 ILCS 190/527740 ILCS 190/10