Submitted photo: Dr. Jane Elza

Senate Bill 171 or the “Safe Communities Act” is an attempt to make it harder for demonstrators to demonstrate primarily by making them responsible for any damage to property during the demonstrations. It is designed to chill speech but wording is important here.

Section 2(i) of the bill raises the charge of simple battery during a demonstration to a misdemeanor of “a high and aggravated nature.” Section 3(b) states that a person who knowingly participates in any of the proscribed acts is guilty of a misdemeanor.

Section 3(b) The assembly of two or more persons for the purpose of committing an unlawful act and the failure to withdraw from the assembly on being lawfully commanded to do so by a police officer and before any member of the assembly has inflicted injury to the person or property of another can be charged with a misdemeanor of a high and aggravated nature. “For the purpose of committing an unlawful act,” “lawfully commanded” and by a police officer are phrases that have long been interpreted by the courts in free speech cases and usually in favor of the speaker.

Section 3(3c) A person who knowingly participates in the assembly of seven or more persons and commits violence against the person or property of another within such assembly shall be guilty of a felony and upon conviction thereof shall be punished by an imprisonment for not less than one year or more than five years or a fine of not less than $1,000 nor more than $5,000 or both. 

“And commits violence” is the key phrase. There are any number of laws on the books that impose punishments on people who commit violence during demonstrations. The charge must be against the person who actually inflicted the damage, threw the rock, looted the store, etc. Just participating in a demonstration that got out of hand should not subject the participant to this charge. We can debate whether increasing punishment for actions really deters the action.

The same penalty is imposed when a person “purposely or recklessly” obstructs any highway or street as to render it impassable and fails or refuses to remove the obstruction after being given a “reasonable official request or the order of a police officer.” It will be interesting to see how this is applied if those antivaxxer truckers were to surround the Capitol in Atlanta.

The permit provisions of the bill require that applications must be reviewed by an attorney representing the governing authority and by all heads of law enforcement agencies of the county or municipality. 36 OCG 60-29 would require all organizations to submit the names and contact information for all individuals responsible for managing and maintaining order during the event along with an emergency action plan that addresses any first aid and security resources provided by the applicant. 

These requirements are over the top and likely will not stand constitutional scrutiny.

What’s really new about this bill is the waiving of sovereign immunity in cases where violence and destruction of property occurs. 36 OCG 60-30 would make governing authorities civilly liable for damage inflicted by failure to provide reasonable law enforcement protection during such riot or unlawful assembly. Governing authorities are forbidden to intentionally obstruct or interfere with the ability of a law enforcement agency (which provides) reasonable law enforcement protection during a riot or unlawful assembly. 

It goes so far as to set up voluntary insurance deductions for police officers who are likely to be sued as a result of his or her role as a public safety employee. This is going to make budget meetings throughout the state more lively.

The governing authority is liable for any damages, including but not limited to, damages arising from personal injury, wrongful death or property damage proximately caused by the agency’s failure to provide reasonable law enforcement protection during such riot or assembly. Even pain and suffering? If you are one of those people who think government should cost less, you really ought to oppose this bill.

Dr. Jane Elza, Ph.D., retired, is a resident of Valdosta.