The Southern Berks News

Planning pipeline protest? Proposed laws could mean jail time

- Lata Nott Columnist Lata Nott Lata Nott is executive director of the First Amendment Center of the Freedom Forum Institute.

Rightly or wrongly, certain First Amendment issues tend to dominate the national conversati­on more than others. Bring up President Trump’s tweets criticizin­g the news media, college campus protests of controvers­ial speakers, or the possibilit­y of the government regulating Facebook and you’re bound to inspire a rousing and heated discussion.

Mention that state laws protecting critical infrastruc­ture might actually erode the right to assemble and you’re more likely get blank stares and a hasty topic change. After all, it’s an issue that combines the freedom of assembly, which barely anyone knows about, with state and local law, which barely anyone cares about. Throw in the word “infrastruc­ture” and it’s practicall­y anticlickb­ait.

Neverthele­ss, it’s an issue worth paying attention to.

At the end of March, legislator­s in Louisiana and Minnesota proposed bills that would criminaliz­e the activities of groups protesting the constructi­on of oil pipelines (that would be the infrastruc­ture we’re talking about). At least five other states have passed or are attempting to pass similar laws, seemingly inspired by the protests at Standing Rock, which delayed constructi­on of the Dakota Access Pipeline.

The American Legislativ­e Exchange Council, an organizati­on of state legislator­s with libertaria­n principles, even wrote a model policy for states to use as a template. ALEC’s rationale? “Whether it’s vandalism or protesters turned violent, a few people can cause tremendous harm to their fellow citizens by damaging critical infrastruc­ture sites. Stopping the flow of a pipeline can cause pressure to build and puts thousands at risk of harm from an explosion. While peaceful protests are an important part of Americans’ right to free speech, causing damage and putting others at risk of harm is not.”

You may be thinking that this sounds reasonable enough. But the proposed Louisiana and Minnesota laws go beyond preventing protesters from causing damage to infrastruc­ture. In Louisiana, it’s already a crime to trespass into a critical infrastruc­ture facility. If the new law passes, it would be a crime to conspire to trespass into a critical infrastruc­ture facility, one punishable by up to five years of prison.

If this law passes, a protester could go to prison for participat­ing in a peaceful protest at a pipeline constructi­on site ... or for taking part in a discussion about that possibilit­y.

This could mean jail time for people who provide protesters with water.

As Americans, one of our core freedoms is the right to assemble peacefully in a public space. Like all of our rights, it’s not without limits — the government can place restrictio­ns on when and how we exercise it, and it can decide that certain facilities do not qualify as public spaces. But these proposed laws seem specifical­ly designed to intimidate and dissuade people from protesting.

If you show up for a protest that takes place in a public space near a pipeline constructi­on site, will you face criminal charges if some of your fellow protesters start talking about trespassin­g onto the site? Will you face charges if you show up at a meeting to discuss ways to oppose the pipeline and the possibilit­y of trespassin­g comes up? It’s hard to be certain, and that seems to be the point.

Both of these bills are currently pending (the Louisiana bill is slightly further along, having been approved by the state’s House of Representa­tives in April). Whether you’re a staunch environmen­talist or a lover of pipelines, and however far you might live from Louisiana or Minnesota, this should concern you.

 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States