Cecily Zamora
In the wake of the Black Lives Matter protests that swept the United States following the murder of George Floyd, Republican-led states introduced punitive new measures governing protests and absolving motorists who hit protesters with their vehicles. This includes legislation granting immunity to drivers whose vehicles strike and injure protesters, as well as bills that would exclude student protesters from federal financial aid and loan forgiveness if they commit any crime at a campus protest. While the right to freedom of speech and assembly is protected in the US, there are laws and regulations in place that govern how and when people can protest. These include requirements for permits, restrictions on private property, and penalties for civil disobedience or ignoring dispersal orders.
| Characteristics | Values |
|---|---|
| Granting immunity to drivers | Oklahoma, Iowa, North Carolina, Rhode Island, Texas, North Dakota, Tennessee, Indiana, Florida, and Kentucky |
| Barring state financial aid from student protesters | Florida |
| Prohibiting protests on public property without a permit | Florida |
| Criminalising civil disobedience or ignoring a dispersal order | Applicable in some states |
| Requiring permits for protests | Washington, D.C. |
Explore related products
What You'll Learn
Immunity for drivers who harm protesters
Since the renewed racial justice protests of 2020, there has been a wave of bills introduced in the United States that reduce or eliminate the liability of drivers who run into protesters. These bills are often referred to as "anti-protest bills" by critics.
Oklahoma
Oklahoma was the first state to pass such a bill, with HB 1674 providing both civil and criminal immunity for injuring or even killing protesters while "fleeing a riot" so long as it was done "unintentionally" while "exercising due care" and under the "reasonable belief" that they needed to flee to protect themselves. The bill was signed by Gov. Kevin Stitt, who described it as an "important protection for citizens who are just trying to get out of a bad situation".
Iowa
Iowa's bill, SF 342, provides civil immunity to any driver who injures someone participating in a "protest, demonstration, riot, or unlawful assembly," engaging in "disorderly conduct," or blocking traffic as long as the driver is exercising "due care". In Iowa, disorderly conduct is defined very broadly and includes something as simple as obstructing a sidewalk, making this bill applicable to any protester on a public street or sidewalk that is deemed to be blocking it.
Tennessee
Tennessee had also been considering a similar bill, HB 513, which would have provided both civil and criminal immunity for drivers if they hit protesters with their vehicle while exercising "due care," even if the protester was only blocking the sidewalk. However, the bill was ultimately tabled after local activist Justin Jones gave impassioned testimony before the Tennessee legislature, describing how the bill was "a license to hunt and a license to kill".
Impact and Criticism
Critics of these bills argue that they are intended to limit demonstrations and put the people involved in them at risk. They also claim that they stifle the right to protest and signal support to drivers who seek out conflict with protesters. However, supporters of the bills claim that they are necessary to protect drivers from "rioters" who might attack passing vehicles and that current laws do not provide adequate protection for those acting in self-defence.
Understanding the NYS Healthcare Proxy Law and Your Rights
You may want to see also
Explore related products
Police powers to break up protests
The First Amendment protects your right to assemble and express your views through protest. However, police and other government officials are allowed to place certain narrow restrictions on the exercise of speech rights. Protesters have the right to make their views known, and the police are charged with safeguarding the public during a demonstration.
Police officers are not permitted to break up a protest unless there is a clear and present danger of riot, disorder, interference with traffic, or another immediate threat to public safety. If officers decide to issue a dispersal order, they must first provide a reasonable opportunity to comply, including sufficient time and a clear, unobstructed exit path. Protestors must receive clear and detailed notice of a dispersal order, including how much time they have to disperse, the consequences of failing to do so, and which exit route to follow.
If you are at a protest, you do not need a permit to march in the streets or on sidewalks, as long as you do not obstruct car or pedestrian traffic. If you do not have a permit, police officers can ask you to move to the side to let others pass or for safety reasons. Certain types of events may require permits, such as a march or parade that requires blocking traffic or street closure, a large rally requiring the use of sound-amplifying devices, or a rally over a certain size at most parks or plazas.
If you are videotaping, be aware that there is a legal distinction between a visual photographic record (which is fully protected) and the audio portion of a videotape, which some states have tried to regulate under state wiretapping laws. You have the right to photograph anything in plain view, including federal buildings and the police. On private property, the owner may set rules about photography or video.
In some states, there are laws that grant immunity to drivers whose vehicles strike and injure protesters in public streets. There are also laws that would exclude student protesters from federal financial aid and loan forgiveness if they commit any crime at a campus protest.
Social Contracts: Legally Binding?
You may want to see also
Explore related products
Protesters' right to photograph
In the United States, protesters generally have the right to photograph anything in plain view when they are lawfully present in any public space. This includes federal buildings and the police. However, on private property, the owner may set rules related to photography and videography. Protesters should also be mindful of the privacy and safety of their fellow protesters when taking and posting photos. It is generally recommended to avoid capturing and posting images that clearly show the faces of other protesters, as these can be used for surveillance and identification by law enforcement or employers. Protest photographers should also be aware of their legal rights and the potential consequences of their actions, such as the distinction between visual photographic records, which are fully protected, and the audio portion of a video, which some states have tried to regulate under state wiretapping laws.
While protesters have the right to photograph in public spaces, this does not grant them the right to interfere with the activities of others or violate private property rights. For example, protesters are generally required to obtain a permit if their demonstration obstructs car or pedestrian traffic or requires the closure of streets. Failure to comply with permit requirements or police dispersal orders can result in legal consequences, including arrest and criminal charges.
In recent years, there has been a wave of new anti-protest legislation introduced in the United States, particularly in Republican-led states. These laws aim to restrict the right to protest and assemble, with some granting immunity to drivers who strike and injure protesters obstructing traffic. Additionally, certain bills propose excluding student protesters from federal financial aid and loan forgiveness if they commit any crime during a campus protest. These measures have sparked debates around the balance between public order and the right to peaceful assembly and free speech.
It is important for protesters to understand their legal rights and responsibilities when participating in demonstrations. While photography can be a powerful tool for documenting and sharing ideas, it should be exercised with respect for the privacy and safety of others. Protesters should also be mindful of the potential consequences of their actions and the dynamic nature of the legal landscape surrounding protest rights. By staying informed and exercising their rights responsibly, protesters can effectively advocate for their causes while minimizing potential risks.
Juvenile Justice: Three Strikes and You're Out?
You may want to see also
Explore related products
Protesters' right to remain silent
Protest is a fundamental way to demand accountability and inspire hope for a better future. It has been a driving force behind some of the most powerful social movements in history, such as the Salt March against British colonial rule in India in 1930, the decades of Pride marches that followed the Stonewall Riots in 1969, and the Black Lives Matter protests in recent years.
However, the right to protest is constantly under threat from those in power who wish to maintain the status quo and silence dissenting voices. This has resulted in the introduction of punitive measures and legislation aimed at restricting the right to protest, particularly in the wake of the Black Lives Matter protests that swept the world following the murder of George Floyd.
One example of such legislation is the bill introduced by Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, which toughened existing laws governing public disorder and was hailed as "the strongest anti-looting, anti-rioting, pro-law-enforcement piece of legislation in the country." Similarly, Republican legislators in Oklahoma and Iowa have passed bills granting immunity to drivers who strike and injure protesters, while a Republican proposal in Indiana seeks to bar anyone convicted of unlawful assembly from holding state employment.
In light of these developments, it is crucial for protesters to understand their rights, including the right to remain silent. The right to silence is a basic right that has been enshrined in the common-law tradition inherited from England, particularly in countries formerly part of the British Empire, such as the United States and Commonwealth nations. In the US, this right is protected by the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution, which states that no person shall be compelled to be a witness against himself or herself.
If you are a protester, it is important to know that you have the right to remain silent if you are arrested or detained. You can simply state that you wish to remain silent and ask to speak to a lawyer immediately. Do not say or sign anything without a lawyer present, and remember that you have the right to make a local phone call to contact your lawyer, which the police are not allowed to listen to. Additionally, you do not have to consent to a search of yourself or your belongings, and police officers cannot confiscate or view your photographs or videos without a warrant.
Exercising your right to remain silent is a powerful tool to protect yourself during a protest or any other interaction with law enforcement. It ensures that you do not inadvertently incriminate yourself or compromise your legal defence. By understanding and asserting your rights, you can safeguard your freedom and continue to raise your voice against injustice.
Judicial Power: Can Judges Change Laws?
You may want to see also
Student protesters' access to financial aid
In recent years, students across the United States have been organizing protests to demand that their colleges and universities denounce Israel's attacks on Gaza and divest from companies profiting from these conflicts. Students have faced tear gas, police beatings, harassment, arrests, suspensions, and other academic consequences as a result of their involvement in these protests.
In response to these protests, some lawmakers have introduced legislation to revoke financial aid for student protesters. California Republican lawmakers, for example, have called for the revocation of financial aid for student protesters who commit violence during college campus protests. Similarly, a bill introduced in March 2025 would exclude student protesters from federal financial aid and loan forgiveness if they commit any crime at a campus protest. The bill covers any offense under federal or state law related to an individual's conduct during a protest at a college or university.
Another bill would bar state financial aid from college and university students who violate campus rules or are convicted of a crime related to a "disruptive" protest on campus. The bill defines "materially and substantially disruptive conduct" broadly to include conduct that would "hinder" another person's expressive activity or prevent a "lawful meeting" or "gathering," including by creating "loud or sustained noise" or "occupying or materially disrupting" access to campus facilities.
Students who participate in protests may also face indirect consequences related to their financial aid. For example, students who are suspended or arrested as a result of their involvement in protests may lose credits for the current semester, which could affect their eligibility for financial aid. Additionally, students who are expelled from their university due to their participation in protests may no longer be eligible for financial aid.
It is important for students interested in engaging in peaceful protest to familiarize themselves with the rules and regulations on their campus to ensure that their rights are respected by college administrators and police. Students who are involved in protests and face suspension or loss of financial aid may be able to appeal the decision, and a lawyer may be able to help with the appeal process.
International Law in China: How to Get In?
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
There is no law that explicitly states that protesters can be killed. However, some US states have introduced bills that grant immunity to drivers whose vehicles strike and injure protesters. These bills generally apply to drivers who unintentionally injure or kill a protester who is obstructing traffic as part of an unlawful assembly.
An unlawful assembly is a gathering that poses a clear and present danger of riot, disorder, interference with traffic, or other immediate threats to public safety. Police officers may issue a dispersal order to break up an unlawful assembly, and individuals who fail to comply may be arrested or charged.
Protesters have the right to free speech and assembly, as protected by the First Amendment. They can lawfully gather on public property or private property with the consent of the owner. Protesters also have the right to photograph and videotape anything in plain view, including federal buildings and police officers. However, they must not obstruct car or pedestrian traffic and must comply with any lawful orders from police officers.
Violating protest laws can result in criminal charges, including misdemeanors or felonies. This includes engaging in civil disobedience, ignoring dispersal orders, or obstructing traffic. Additionally, some states have proposed bills that would exclude student protesters from federal financial aid and loan forgiveness if they commit any crimes during a campus protest.
