Legislators Stand by Laws to Protect Drivers Who
Kill Protesters
By Zaid
Jilani, Lee Fang
August
15, 2017 "Information
Clearing House"
- In the aftermath of the murder of activist
Heather Heyer in Charlottesville, Virginia,
state legislators who had previously pushed to
shield drivers who killed protesters with a
moving vehicle are largely standing by their
various efforts, arguing that their legislation
would not have applied in this weekend’s attack.
Before
the killing on Saturday, a swath of bills had
been proposed around the country, largely in the
South and primarily in response to Black Lives
Matter and Dakota Access Pipeline related
protests. The bills targeted leftist
demonstrators who have increasingly shut down
traffic by blocking roads and highways to bring
attention to their cause.
Under
the proposed laws, motorists who struck and
killed such protesters would have special
immunity in certain circumstances, as long as it
wasn’t proven that they acted deliberately.
Heyer was struck by a car allegedly driven by
James Alex Fields Jr., a young man who is
a supporter of white nationalist causes.
None of
the proposed motorist immunity bills — debated
in half a dozen states and backed by far-right
personalities and law enforcement interests
— have been made into law. Rather than backing
away from the policy in light of the events in
Charlottesville, legislators are doubling down.
In Texas, state Rep. Pat Fallon introduced
a bill to limit the liability of motorists
responsible for hitting individuals who are
“blocking traffic in a public right-of-way while
participating in a protest or
demonstration.” The Combined Law Enforcement
Associations of Texas, a statewide coalition of
municipal and county police associations, lists
Fallon’s bill among legislation supported by
CLEAT. (Cleats are the spikes on the bottom of
athletic shoes.)
In response to criticism over the
weekend, Fallon doubled
down on social
media, implying that his critics don’t know the
difference between legal and illegal protest
(the Facebook status he links to has been
deleted):
North
Carolina’s version of the immunity bill, HB 330,
passed the lower chamber of the legislature in
April. The text of the bill says that a “person
driving an automobile who is exercising due care
and injures another person who is participating
in a protest or demonstration and is blocking
traffic in a public right-of-way is immune from
civil liability for the injury.” The definition
of “due care,” of course, would be highly
debatable.
On
Monday morning, the bill’s co-sponsors, state
Reps. Justin Burr and Chris Millis, released a
joint statement defending their legislation and
claiming it would not apply in the context of
Charlottesville.
“It is
intellectually dishonest and a gross
mischaracterization to portray North Carolina
House Bill 330 as a protection measure for the
act of violence that occurred in Charlottesville
this past weekend,” they wrote in a statement
given to The Intercept. “Any individual who
committed a deliberate or willful act, such as
what happened this weekend in Charlottesville,
would face appropriately severe criminal and
civil liabilities.”
A spokesperson for
North Carolina Gov. Roy Cooper, a Democrat, said
on Monday that the governor would veto the
legislation if it reached his desk.
North
Carolina Democratic Party Chair Wayne Goodwin
lashed out at the bill on Monday. “This was a
horrible and dangerous piece of legislation when
Republicans introduced it, and it remains an
unnecessary bill today,” he told The Intercept.
“The right to peacefully demonstrate is a
cornerstone of American democracy; however, with
this bill, North Carolina Republicans are
threatening that right by giving certain drivers
a free pass to run over protesters without any
fear of civil liability. After the events in
Charlottesville, when a domestic terrorist
murdered a peaceful protester with his car, it’s
unconscionable that Republicans still think this
is a worthy cause.”
Similar
bills have been proposed in Rhode Island, North
Carolina, Tennessee, and North Dakota. While
it’s unclear if any major interest groups beyond
law enforcement have supported the idea, police
union support alone can provide publicity and
legislative traction.
No
Advertising
- No
Government
Grants
-
This
Is
Independent
Media
|
In Florida, state Sen. George Gainer sponsored
SB 1096, a bill that limits liability for
motorists responsible for the unintentional
injury or death of protesters obstructing
traffic. The Florida State Fraternal Order of
Police, an association that represents 22,000
law enforcement personnel in the state, held a
press conference to support the Gainer bill. The
legislative
newsletter
sponsored by the Florida FOP features an image
of law enforcement officers standing behind
Gainer to pledge support for the measure.
The
Florida FOP’s legislative newsletter
features law enforcement standing in support
of state Sen. George Gainer’s bill.
The
Florida bill, however, died in committee before
reaching a vote.
But the
violence last weekend hasn’t prevented some law
enforcement voices from continuing to press the
issue.
In Massachusetts, a police officer cheered on
Heyer’s death over the weekend,
posting on
Facebook, “Hahahaha love this, maybe people
shouldn’t block road ways.”
And on YouTube and other platforms frequented by
far-right voices, many have celebrated the
effort to crack down on protests that block
traffic. Donut Operator, a YouTube personality
known for posting “Blue Lives Matter” videos in
support of law enforcement, has published videos
in support of the laws designed to limit the
liability of motorists. In one such video in
support of the North Carolina legislation, Donut
Operator ends his monologue with a
gleeful compilation
of cars plowing through crowds of demonstrators.
This article was first published by
The Intercept
-
The
views expressed in this article are solely those
of the author and do not necessarily reflect the
opinions of Information Clearing House.