1
00:00:08,119 --> 00:00:10,000
Speaker 1: More than three and a half million people took to

2
00:00:10,080 --> 00:00:12,959
Speaker 1: the streets in Washington, d C. In all fifty states

3
00:00:13,000 --> 00:00:17,000
Speaker 1: on Saturday to protest peacefully in the Women's Marches, marching

4
00:00:17,040 --> 00:00:20,079
Speaker 1: and demonstrating our rights that have been exercised in this country,

5
00:00:20,120 --> 00:00:24,840
Speaker 1: to protest civil rights violations, the Vietnam War, LGBT rights.

6
00:00:25,079 --> 00:00:28,720
Speaker 1: The list goes on, but now Republican lawmakers in five

7
00:00:28,800 --> 00:00:33,440
Speaker 1: states have introduced bills to criminalize peaceful protests. They ranged

8
00:00:33,440 --> 00:00:36,239
Speaker 1: from a villa in Minnesota to increase fines for freeway

9
00:00:36,280 --> 00:00:39,440
Speaker 1: protests up to three thousand dollars in a year in jail,

10
00:00:39,840 --> 00:00:42,560
Speaker 1: to a villain North Dakota that would not penalize a

11
00:00:42,640 --> 00:00:47,640
Speaker 1: driver who negligently runs over and kills protesters on highways.

12
00:00:47,640 --> 00:00:50,480
Speaker 1: Our guest is Timothy Zike, professor at William and Mary

13
00:00:50,560 --> 00:00:54,280
Speaker 1: Law School and author of Speech out of Doors Preserving

14
00:00:54,360 --> 00:01:00,320
Speaker 1: First Amendment Liberties in Public Places. Timothy, these target non

15
00:01:00,480 --> 00:01:04,680
Speaker 1: violent protests and sound like violations of the First Amendment.

16
00:01:04,840 --> 00:01:09,280
Speaker 1: Are they well? Some of them could be um, some

17
00:01:09,360 --> 00:01:14,720
Speaker 1: of the laws might be deemed disproportionate to the government's interests,

18
00:01:14,760 --> 00:01:17,760
Speaker 1: and things like UM, the free flow of traffic on

19
00:01:17,840 --> 00:01:21,440
Speaker 1: highways UH and public safety and order. In those sorts

20
00:01:21,480 --> 00:01:24,759
Speaker 1: of things, there's a requirement that when you regulate speed,

21
00:01:25,040 --> 00:01:28,760
Speaker 1: especially in traditional public forum which are things like public

22
00:01:28,800 --> 00:01:32,160
Speaker 1: streets and public parks and sidewalks, that you do so

23
00:01:32,319 --> 00:01:35,959
Speaker 1: with some measure of care. So some of these measures

24
00:01:36,280 --> 00:01:39,960
Speaker 1: could violate the First Amendment through that sort of analysis.

25
00:01:40,120 --> 00:01:44,200
Speaker 1: Others seems to single out particular types of protests, for example,

26
00:01:44,319 --> 00:01:49,000
Speaker 1: union protests, and the Supreme Court has been very clear, uh, indeed,

27
00:01:49,000 --> 00:01:52,000
Speaker 1: with respect to laws that do exactly that, that the

28
00:01:52,080 --> 00:01:54,880
Speaker 1: government doesn't have the power it cannot under the First

29
00:01:54,920 --> 00:01:59,760
Speaker 1: Amendment single out particular speakers or messages under the First

30
00:01:59,800 --> 00:02:02,720
Speaker 1: and Endment. So it's possible that at least some of

31
00:02:02,720 --> 00:02:06,400
Speaker 1: these measures would violate current First Amendment free speech and

32
00:02:06,440 --> 00:02:13,400
Speaker 1: assembly standards. Timmy, even if they do, uh potentially violate

33
00:02:13,440 --> 00:02:18,040
Speaker 1: the First Amendment, and even if they would get struck down, Uh,

34
00:02:18,160 --> 00:02:21,639
Speaker 1: are there concerns that you have about them that they

35
00:02:21,680 --> 00:02:28,000
Speaker 1: would chill speech if they did go uh into effect. Yeah,

36
00:02:28,040 --> 00:02:31,320
Speaker 1: I think even if they they didn't violate First Amendment doctrine,

37
00:02:31,360 --> 00:02:34,520
Speaker 1: they seem to be inconsistent with what you might say

38
00:02:34,600 --> 00:02:37,200
Speaker 1: is the spirit of the First Amendment freedom of speech

39
00:02:37,240 --> 00:02:40,240
Speaker 1: and free assembly in the places that I mentioned, uh,

40
00:02:40,280 --> 00:02:42,919
Speaker 1: in the sense that they seem to be designed to

41
00:02:43,160 --> 00:02:48,480
Speaker 1: chill or suppress UM protests. Now, on the flip side

42
00:02:48,480 --> 00:02:50,760
Speaker 1: of that, we have to acknowledge there is no First

43
00:02:50,800 --> 00:02:55,839
Speaker 1: Amendment right to block traffic. There's no First Amendment right,

44
00:02:56,520 --> 00:03:01,200
Speaker 1: uh to engage in this sort of disruptive behavior that

45
00:03:01,360 --> 00:03:04,120
Speaker 1: some of the protesters have engaged in. So you have

46
00:03:04,200 --> 00:03:06,120
Speaker 1: to give the state its due in the sense that

47
00:03:06,160 --> 00:03:10,440
Speaker 1: it's allowed to um, you know, pass laws to maintain

48
00:03:10,520 --> 00:03:13,800
Speaker 1: public order and safety. But the concern is that many

49
00:03:13,840 --> 00:03:16,200
Speaker 1: of these laws, most of the facts, seem to go

50
00:03:16,280 --> 00:03:20,720
Speaker 1: beyond that their existing laws that, for example, punished that

51
00:03:20,840 --> 00:03:25,400
Speaker 1: that sort of civil disobedience, but these laws seek to increase.

52
00:03:25,480 --> 00:03:28,400
Speaker 1: Find for example, the ten thousand dollars to make the

53
00:03:28,440 --> 00:03:32,600
Speaker 1: offensive felony as opposed to misdemeanor. And think about the

54
00:03:32,639 --> 00:03:36,640
Speaker 1: disportmate impact that those sorts of laws have on students

55
00:03:36,680 --> 00:03:39,680
Speaker 1: on the poor, who may not be able to afford

56
00:03:40,160 --> 00:03:43,960
Speaker 1: that kind of judgment, and then for whom civil disobedience

57
00:03:44,000 --> 00:03:48,520
Speaker 1: becomes um costly uh in the sense of fines and

58
00:03:48,560 --> 00:03:52,880
Speaker 1: potential imprisonment, And the calculus changes quite a bit in

59
00:03:52,880 --> 00:03:57,440
Speaker 1: that sense, Tim very surprising is the bill in North

60
00:03:57,520 --> 00:04:01,360
Speaker 1: Dakota that would not penalize a driver who negligently runs

61
00:04:01,440 --> 00:04:05,040
Speaker 1: over and kills protesters on highways. No, they shouldn't be

62
00:04:05,040 --> 00:04:07,960
Speaker 1: blocking the highway, let's say. But that seems to take

63
00:04:08,000 --> 00:04:12,880
Speaker 1: this out of the hands of the police and the courts. Well,

64
00:04:13,320 --> 00:04:15,680
Speaker 1: I'm surprised by that when I hadn't I hadn't seen

65
00:04:15,760 --> 00:04:19,480
Speaker 1: that before brought to my attention, and I have to say,

66
00:04:19,720 --> 00:04:24,159
Speaker 1: it completely flips around the understanding again under the First Amendment,

67
00:04:24,760 --> 00:04:30,120
Speaker 1: that protesters are entitled to use these traditional public forums

68
00:04:30,240 --> 00:04:34,840
Speaker 1: for protests and civil disobedience and communicating in all sorts

69
00:04:34,880 --> 00:04:37,800
Speaker 1: of manners, and to make it dangerous for them, and

70
00:04:37,880 --> 00:04:40,000
Speaker 1: the sense that you provide an immunity to a driver

71
00:04:40,640 --> 00:04:45,280
Speaker 1: who negligently runs over a protester. Um. I don't want

72
00:04:45,279 --> 00:04:48,720
Speaker 1: to say it encourages reckless behavior, but it might. And

73
00:04:48,800 --> 00:04:54,120
Speaker 1: it certainly is wildly inconsistent with the tradition we've had

74
00:04:54,120 --> 00:04:59,200
Speaker 1: in this country of allowing protesters, even when they're disruptive,

75
00:04:59,680 --> 00:05:03,440
Speaker 1: to have their say, to engage in assembly, to engage

76
00:05:03,440 --> 00:05:08,640
Speaker 1: in mass protests in public streets. Tim there's also some

77
00:05:08,760 --> 00:05:14,279
Speaker 1: legislation in Minnesota involving uh, penalties for obstructing the legal process.

78
00:05:14,520 --> 00:05:16,120
Speaker 1: Are you familiar with that, and if you can, you

79
00:05:16,120 --> 00:05:20,080
Speaker 1: explain what that means. Well, I'm not sure exactly what

80
00:05:20,120 --> 00:05:22,120
Speaker 1: it means. There might be part of the problem could

81
00:05:22,160 --> 00:05:24,719
Speaker 1: be there could be a vagueness problem with laws and

82
00:05:24,880 --> 00:05:28,320
Speaker 1: ordinances of that sort. A person who is subject to

83
00:05:28,360 --> 00:05:30,560
Speaker 1: the law has to know in plain English what the

84
00:05:30,640 --> 00:05:34,800
Speaker 1: law forbid um. If it is the case that that

85
00:05:34,920 --> 00:05:38,680
Speaker 1: is um some sort of public order offense, that a

86
00:05:38,720 --> 00:05:42,920
Speaker 1: protester who doesn't immediately cooperate in some way, who stands

87
00:05:42,960 --> 00:05:46,120
Speaker 1: in this place as opposed to another, and is arrested

88
00:05:46,120 --> 00:05:49,440
Speaker 1: on that basis, then the concern with laws like that

89
00:05:49,880 --> 00:05:52,440
Speaker 1: and all sorts of public order laws is the massive

90
00:05:52,520 --> 00:05:57,200
Speaker 1: discretion that those laws placed in the hands of officers

91
00:05:57,240 --> 00:06:00,720
Speaker 1: who can arrest for what would seem manly be very

92
00:06:00,839 --> 00:06:06,719
Speaker 1: minor offenses and again subject protesters and assemblers to um

93
00:06:06,960 --> 00:06:09,839
Speaker 1: some very strict penalties. Jim, we will have to leave

94
00:06:09,880 --> 00:06:12,719
Speaker 1: it there for now. That's Tim Zike, professor at William

95
00:06:12,800 --> 00:06:13,799
Speaker 1: and Mary Law School,