I must take strong issue with the April 14 excerpt of Chief Justice Frank Williams’s State of the Judiciary message on the commentary pages (“Put off the courthouse”).

On Feb. 6, my brother and I had our SLAPP-Back case against Sen. Steven Alves heard before an openly hostile Supreme Court. We were seeking to recoup the more than $100,000 it cost us to defend ourselves from Senator Alves’s unfounded attack on our First Amendment right to criticize him in letters to the editor.

Alves was advised not to file suit against us, did so anyway, lost, and knew he was in trouble, since Rhode Island law protects citizens from being punished with lawsuits intended to prevent them from practicing their constitutional rights. We wanted a trial by jury to settle this thing once and for all.

In his March 26 State of the Judiciary speech before the General Assembly, Chief Justice Williams said he “realized the tenuous financial condition of the state” and was proposing that the new courthouse he coveted “be delayed until next year and no additional funds for staffing would be requested.”

On April 3, the Supreme Court released its unanimous decision that exonerated Senate Finance Chairman Steven Alves, whom Senate President Joseph Montalbano has called his good friend, of further financial culpability. We would be denied our day in court.

On April 11, Chief Justice Williams proudly announced that he had cut a deal with Montalbano. The new courthouse, while delayed, would be built in Smithfield for $17 million more than was previously requested, and his budget increased for additional staff.

It seemed painfully obvious to me that Chief Justice Williams traded his integrity and willingly subverted justice to fund his dream of a new courthouse and keep his judicial pensions intact by protecting Senator Alves.

Every attorney I asked to review the ruling said the court was far out of line, that it rewrote civil procedure to make Alves a winner. Unfortunately, that ruling will serve to silence critics of government.

If Chief Justice Williams had any integrity, he would have stepped away from the case and remanded it back to a Superior Court jury. The court expressed the sentiment that Senator Alves had “suffered” enough. What?

That is what we call justice “the Rhode Island way.”

My brother and I would be more than willing to publicly debate Williams on the legal issues involved in our case.

Hopefully the Feds are watching this little debacle, will take note and will draw Williams into Operation Dollar Bill, along with Alves and Montalbano. We can only pray that real justice will be finally served.

Ask yourselves: Why would the Supreme Court support a person whose main objective in his lawsuit was to annihilate free speech? I think the answer is pretty clear.

BILL PALAZZO

Coventry