Bill is an attack on fundamental freedoms

“The right of the people peaceably to assemble, to consult for the common good, and to petition the government, or any department thereof, shall never be abridged.” — Article 1, Section 4 of the Wisconsin State Constitution.

The language is clear and unambiguous.

The people have a right to gather and be heard, even if, as a government official, you don’t like what they are saying, or find them annoying or bothersome.

Senate Bill 94 seeks to stifle that right to gather and be heard by expanding, to the point of absurdity, the legal definition of a riot and by holding organizers and everyone participating in a protest accountable for any disturbances taking place, regardless if they were involved or in those actions or not.

SB94 defines a riot as a public disturbance, an act of violence or a “clear and present danger” of property destruction or personal injury involving at least three people. In addition, as was reported in the May 20 Wisconsin Examiner, owners of property damaged or vandalized during what the bill defines as a “riot” would also be able to seek civil damages from people or organizations that “provided material support or resources with the intent that such support or resources would be used to perpetrate the offense,” under the bill. It also prohibits government officials with direct authority over law enforcement agencies from limiting or restricting those agencies’ ability to quell vandalism or rioting, as defined by the bill.

“Using that definition, a riot could be three teenagers driving around in a car knocking off mail boxes,”said Jon McCray Jones, a policy analyst at the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Wisconsin. McCray noted that a food fight would fall under the bill’s definition of a riot.

Destruction of public or private property and acts of physical violence are never acceptable parts of a peaceful assembly. Those who willfully harm others or who destroy property or commit other crimes should be arrested and prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

Law enforcement and the court system have no shortage of existing laws on the books to enforce the peace and ensure that public safety is maintained.

At its most favorable interpretation, SB94 is an unnecessary duplication of legal restrictions. At its worst, the bill’s intent is to suppress the people’s right to gather and be heard under the weight of holding every person there accountable for the actions of an individual or few, to the point where even sharing a social media post urging people to come to a rally could extend the risk of civil and criminal liability if something went wrong.

In written testimony on the bill on May 7, co-author Sen. Dan Feyen of Fond du Lac stated “a line needs to be drawn when those protests go from being peaceful to being destructive and violent.”

The concern is the line being drawn is straight through the constitutional language guaranteeing the right of the people to assemble and to have their voices heard.

Legislators must reject SB94’s overly broad language and absurd definitions and ensure that fundamental freedoms are not trampled under the desire for order.

Central Wisconsin Publications Editorial Board consists of publisher Kris O’Leary and Star News editor Brian Wilson