Does the anti-SLAPP statute bar a plaintiff from bringing a motion to strike a claim for damages arising from a protected right of speech and petition?

participation in matters of public significance, and . . . this participation should not be chilled through abuse of the judicial process." ( 425.16, subd. (a).) The anti-SLAPP statute does not bar liability for claims arising from protected rights. (Baral v. Schnitt (2016) 1 Cal.5th 376, 384.) Instead, it weeds out meritless claims at an early stage of the litigation. (Ibid.) Section 425.16, subdivision (b)(1) provides: "A cause of action against a person arising from any act of that person in furtherance of the person's right of petition or free speech under the United States Constitution or the California Constitution in connection with a public issue shall be subject to a special motion to strike, unless the court determines that the plaintiff has established that there is a probability that the plaintiff will prevail on the claim." Protected acts in furtherance of speech and petition rights include written and oral statements made in judicial proceedings. ( 425.16, subd. (e).)