Salem, OR – The Oregon Court of Appeals has ruled in favor of U.S. Rep. Andrea Salinas, concluding that her 2022 campaign ad, which claimed that her Republican opponent Mike Erickson was “charged with felony drug possession,” did not violate state law. The court’s decision, issued this week, upheld the ad’s accuracy, stating that a reasonable person could interpret the statement as true.
The case dates back to the 2022 election when Salinas and Erickson faced off in a heated race. Erickson, who lost to Salinas in November 2022, argued that the ad, which featured an image of four lines of an unidentified white powder, played a significant role in his defeat. The ad referenced Erickson’s 2016 arrest for drunken driving, during which officers found an oxycodone pill in his wallet. While police recommended drug charges, Erickson ultimately pleaded guilty to driving under the influence and completed a diversion program, with prosecutors agreeing not to pursue drug charges.
Erickson sued Salinas in October 2022, alleging that her ad misrepresented his legal history and seeking $800,000 in damages for campaign expenses related to rebutting the claims. He argued that Salinas had recklessly disregarded the truth, continuing to run the ad even after both his attorney and the prosecutor had clarified that no drug possession charges had been filed against him.
A Clackamas County judge initially sided with Erickson, ruling that Salinas had shown a reckless disregard for the truth. However, Salinas appealed the decision under Oregon’s anti-SLAPP law, designed to protect free speech against lawsuits aimed at silencing public criticism.
The three-judge panel of the Oregon Court of Appeals ruled unanimously in Salinas’ favor, emphasizing that the ad could reasonably be understood as factually accurate. The judges cited an incident report from the 2016 arrest, which listed felony possession of oxycodone as a potential charge. The report, combined with Erickson’s release agreement, led the court to conclude that the ad’s wording—stating that Erickson was “charged” with a crime—was consistent with law enforcement’s use of the term.
The ruling reinforced the protections for political speech in Oregon, with Salinas’ attorney, Ben Stafford, expressing satisfaction with the decision. Stafford argued that the court correctly recognized that campaign statements, if reasonably interpreted as accurate, are protected under state law.
Salinas, who won the election by a larger margin in 2024, declined to comment further on the case. Erickson’s attorney did not respond to requests for comment.
The appeals court’s ruling marks the latest chapter in the ongoing legal battle, which saw Salinas’ ad scrutinized for its portrayal of Erickson’s legal history. Despite the controversy, the decision reaffirms the legal standard that political speech, particularly in campaign ads, is often afforded a broad level of protection under Oregon law.
