Tennessee lawmakers pass buffer when approaching police, limits aimed at neo-Nazi activity
A law that could ban standing within 25 feet of a police officer after being told to retreat has passed the Tennessee General Assembly.
Passage of the legislation is prompting First Amendment concerns from some lawmakers and free speech experts who say that such laws make observing police misconduct nearly impossible and protests more dangerous.
Following a rash of intense neo-Nazi activity in downtown Nashville in the summer 2024, House Majority Leader William Lamberth, R-Portland, filed House Bill 55, known as the Protecting Everyone Against Crime and Extremism (PEACE) Act. The legislation seeks to address a number of methods that were used by neo-Nazi members to intimidate Nashville residents over the summer in 2024.
It passed the House on April 21 in a 70-20 vote and in the Senate on April 14 in a 30-2 vote.
The bill is co-sponsored by Sen. Mark Pody, R-Lebanon, and comes after years of historically large protests at the state Capitol.
The bill criminalizes "intentionally (approaching) within 25 feet" a law enforcement officer who is conducting either a lawful traffic stop, an active investigation of "the scene of an alleged crime," or an "ongoing and immediate threat to public safety," after being told to stop or retreat.
It also adds misdemeanor penalties for littering or trespassing on personal property with the intent to intimidate, as well as for giving a false name to law enforcement after being detained and transporting people within the cargo area of a box truck and placing signs on roadways.
More: White supremacist group marched in Nashville without permit; breached U-Haul customer contract
The bill also expands the circumstances in which an officer can arrest or detain an individual for a misdemeanor to include when an officer only has "probable cause" to believe someone committed an offense, "regardless of whether the offense was committed in the peace officer's presence," and requires that officers note their reasons for not issuing a citation to someone upon arrest.
A number of activities addressed in the bill relate to the series of repeated neo-Nazi marches and appearances in Nashville, including one instance where white supremacist group The Patriot Front marched up the steps of the state Capitol on July 6, chanting "deportation saves the nation" and "Sig Heil," a German phrase and Nazi salute which means "Heil (to) victory." The group arrived there after being transported in the back of U-Haul box trucks.
Concerns surrounding the bill largely rest on the buffer portion of the law as lawmakers and First Amendment experts across the country have called out the law as an unconstitutional barrier for journalists and residents observing and reporting on potential police misconduct, and as a way for law enforcement to crack down on constitutionally protected protests.
"Let's start with the name: the PEACE Act is Orwellian," said Rep. Aftyn Behn, D-Nashville, in a statement following the bill's passage at the Senate on April 21. "The bill isn't about peace — it's about suppressing dissent, silencing protest, and expanding unchecked police power."
Behn filed an amendment to the bill that would have removed the buffer portion of the law, but the House rejected the amendment. She later commended her fellow Democrats in the Senate for unanimously voting against the bill, calling it a "clear stand for the First Amendment and the right to protest."
"This isn't an antisemitism bill — it's an anti-civil liberties bill. It's a direct response to years of protest, organizing and public visibility — from racial justice to reproductive freedom to pro-Palestinian solidarity," she said. "The GOP is trying to criminalize movement work, not protest public safety."
In a statement, Lamberth defended the bill as a way to help law enforcement perform their duties better.
'A 25-foot buffer zone for working law enforcement is a reasonable distance to protect the public's safety and ensure our officers are able to perform their duties unobstructed," Lamberth said.
Under current Tennessee law, it is already a crime to obstruct law enforcement from carrying out official duties.
Similar buffer-zone laws in Arizona, Louisiana, Florida and Indiana, which have no exception for journalists, have all faced public and legal pushback on First Amendment grounds.
More: Leaders wrestle with solving Nashville's neo-Nazi problem while protecting free speech
In Indiana, a buffer-zone law faced two civil rights lawsuits, and was struck down on the second as unconstitutional in September. In Arizona, a 2022 buffer-zone law that banned filming an officer within 8 feet was similarly struck down.
Most recently, in Louisiana, a nearly identical law was temporarily blocked by a federal judge in late January as it faces a lawsuit by multiple news organizations and First Amendment lawyers.
Emily Hockett, a legal fellow with the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, a nonprofit legal group whose attorneys sued the state of Louisiana over the buffer law, said in a statement that the Louisiana law was 'troubling.'
'The law has no exceptions,' she said in the statement. 'It does not matter if the officer's order to stop approaching is objectively unreasonable. Nor does it matter if complying would make observing law enforcement activity impossible, because it would obstruct the view of onlookers…Finally, it does not matter if the person being told to stop approaching is a journalist.'
She said the author of the Indiana version of the same law had previously stated that the law was created in response to the riots of 2020 that followed the murder of George Floyd — a murder that may not have prosecuted or come to light if not for the woman who stood near the crime to film it.
'The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, which includes Indiana, has held that there is a First Amendment right to record government officials performing their duties in public," Hockett said. "Though this law does not mention recording law enforcement explicitly, it poses an acute challenge to the right to record. Police would be able to arrest a journalist quietly and peacefully filming nearby, regardless of whether that journalist was interfering with police duties.'
In a statement, Lamberth said that the First Amendment concerns were unfounded.
"This legislation was carefully crafted to guarantee everyone's First Amendment right is protected," said Lamberth. "You can be present, say and record anything you want — that is your constitutional right — but you can't hinder or interfere when a police officer is carrying out their official duties.'
Similar legislation was passed by the Metro Council in Nashville in September to address the neo-Nazi activity, though no buffer laws were included.
The bill marks the second time Lamberth has addressed neo-Nazi activity at the state level, with the first being the House Joint Resolution 963 passed in March 2024.
The USA TODAY Network - Tennessee's coverage of First Amendment issues is funded through a collaboration between the Freedom Forum and Journalism Funding Partners.
Have a story to tell? Reach Angele Latham by email at alatham@gannett.com, by phone at 931-623-9485, or follow her on Twitter at @angele_latham
This article originally appeared on Nashville Tennessean: Tennessee lawmakers pass limits aimed at protests, neo-Nazi activity
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Hamilton Spectator
11 minutes ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Democrats look for reinvention and a new playbook against Trump in key committee race
WASHINGTON (AP) — House Democrats are quietly engaged in a behind-the-scenes race for a key committee position, the second time in as many months that the party has had to fill one of the most prized positions in Congress. Four Democrats are running to be the ranking member on the House Oversight Committee, an investigative panel with public clout, subpoena power and an expansive portfolio. The position is open due to the death last month of Rep. Gerry Connolly of Virginia. While Democrats in the minority have little power to shape the committee's work, the ranking member position comes with an enormous platform — and the possibility of becoming chair if the party wins back the majority in next year's midterm elections. Whoever wins will immediately be squaring off against Republicans as they prepare for splashy hearings this summer on immigration enforcement , LGBTQ rights and former President Joe Biden's age and mental condition while in office. As they hear from the candidates, Democrats are weighing many of the factors that were in play late last year, when Connolly, a veteran member of the committee, fended off a challenge from Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York. A look at how the race is shaping up: The age factor The debate over Biden's age coincides with a reckoning over seniority and generational change happening across the Democratic Party. Four House Democrats are running for the position: Stephen Lynch of Massachusetts, the acting ranking member; Jasmine Crockett of Texas, a viral sensation; Robert Garcia, a former Los Angeles County mayor who has pitched colleagues on a government reform agenda; and Kweisi Mfume of Maryland, former president of the NAACP and civil rights advocate. While Lynch is the most senior of the four, Democrats broadly said they are more open to breaking from seniority than they were in December, when Connolly, then 74, beat out Ocasio-Cortez, 35, for the job. Democrats are interested in how the candidates would communicate with the public, how they would help support lawmakers in battleground districts — and of course, how they would challenge President Donald Trump and his administration. How the four Democrats are making their case Crockett, 44, has pitched herself as the candidate best able to compete with Trump's pugnacious and attention-grabbing style. Democrats, Crockett has argued, often fail to connect with voters and explain why the president's actions may be harmful. She believes she can. 'It's a matter of bringing that in, having a hearing and making sure that we are translating it and amplifying it,' Crockett told MSNBC in an interview. 'Communications has to be a full-on strategy.' Garcia, 47, has focused on government reform and effectiveness, a key issue for Democrats after the Trump administration's blitz across federal agencies and mass firings of federal workers by billionaire Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency. Mfume, 76, has attracted support from members impressed by his longtime stewardship of the nation's oldest civil rights group. He returned to Congress after decades leading the NAACP following the death of a previous Democratic Oversight chair, the late Congressman Elijah Cummings, a fellow Baltimore Democrat. Lynch, 70, has styled himself as the acting chair and the lawmaker best positioned to take on the committee's chairman, Republican James Comer of Kentucky. 'There are some members who speak to a very narrow audience, and that's great,' Lynch said. 'We want them to be energized and animated. But that same person is not going to go to the Rust Belt with people that are farmers, moderates, conservatives,' Lynch told The Associated Press. 'You need different voices to appeal to different constituencies.' 'I think I have a better chance of bringing back the blue-collar working people, and I have less of a chance of appealing to very younger people who are intensely invested in social media,' Lynch said. What's ahead as Democrats make their choice The vote for Oversight ranking member is scheduled for June 24 and will be conducted by secret ballot. All four candidates are speaking before multiple caucuses this week, including the New Democrats and the progressive caucus, the Congressional Black Caucus, the Congressional Hispanic Caucus and the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus. While many Democrats are undecided, others have made up their mind. Some who are privately stumping for their candidate believe it will be a tight race. That makes the public forums and private pitches even more crucial in the run-up to the vote. House progressives are divided over their preferred choice. Three members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus — Crockett, Garcia and Mfume — are vying for the ranking member seat, which makes it unlikely the caucus will back a single candidate. 'We're looking for folks that could expose this kind of corruption and hold Trump and his billionaire donors accountable,' said Rep. Greg Casar of Texas, the Progressive Caucus chair. Rep. Brad Schneider, chair of the centrist New Democrat Coalition, said he's weighing two factors: which candidate could best help Democrats win the 2026 midterm elections and whether they can successfully lead investigations into the Trump administration and 'try to repair some of the damage that's been done.' 'The committee can be a flash point, or it can be a very effective place for us to make our point, and we want to know who's going to do best in that role to make sure the committee works to help us secure 218 (members) next November,' Schneider said. The role of seniority and the Congressional Black Caucus Some Democratic caucuses have traditionally prized seniority as a clear and reliable way for lawmakers of color to rise through the ranks. There has never been a Hispanic Oversight chairman and only one Black chairman, Elijah Cummings. 'The CBC has always stood for seniority,' said Rep. Hank Johnson of Georgia. But Johnson noted that the Black Caucus has at times 'deviated' from that norm. He said many in the caucus are open to a conversation about age. 'So, Steve Lynch, I think, is the next senior member. And but as I said, other factors have to be considered and I'm sure that, along with myself, other CBC members are going through that process,' Johnson said. 'Since I've been here, seniority has had weight,' said Rep. Gregory Meeks of New York, who said he was undecided on which candidate to back. 'But seniority is not the only thing. And there are times and circumstances where the person with the most seniority has not won. Whether that's one of these times or not is what we're going to see.' ___ Associated Press writer Leah Askarinam contributed to this report. Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
Yahoo
14 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Democrats look for reinvention and a new playbook against Trump in key committee race
WASHINGTON (AP) — House Democrats are quietly engaged in a behind-the-scenes race for a key committee position, the second time in as many months that the party has had to fill one of the most prized positions in Congress. Four Democrats are running to be the ranking member on the House Oversight Committee, an investigative panel with public clout, subpoena power and an expansive portfolio. The position is open due to the death last month of Rep. Gerry Connolly of Virginia. While Democrats in the minority have little power to shape the committee's work, the ranking member position comes with an enormous platform — and the possibility of becoming chair if the party wins back the majority in next year's midterm elections. Whoever wins will immediately be squaring off against Republicans as they prepare for splashy hearings this summer on immigration enforcement, LGBTQ rights and former President Joe Biden's age and mental condition while in office. As they hear from the candidates, Democrats are weighing many of the factors that were in play late last year, when Connolly, a veteran member of the committee, fended off a challenge from Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York. A look at how the race is shaping up: The age factor The debate over Biden's age coincides with a reckoning over seniority and generational change happening across the Democratic Party. Four House Democrats are running for the position: Stephen Lynch of Massachusetts, the acting ranking member; Jasmine Crockett of Texas, a viral sensation; Robert Garcia, a former Los Angeles County mayor who has pitched colleagues on a government reform agenda; and Kweisi Mfume of Maryland, former president of the NAACP and civil rights advocate. While Lynch is the most senior of the four, Democrats broadly said they are more open to breaking from seniority than they were in December, when Connolly, then 74, beat out Ocasio-Cortez, 35, for the job. Democrats are interested in how the candidates would communicate with the public, how they would help support lawmakers in battleground districts — and of course, how they would challenge President Donald Trump and his administration. How the four Democrats are making their case Crockett, 44, has pitched herself as the candidate best able to compete with Trump's pugnacious and attention-grabbing style. Democrats, Crockett has argued, often fail to connect with voters and explain why the president's actions may be harmful. She believes she can. 'It's a matter of bringing that in, having a hearing and making sure that we are translating it and amplifying it,' Crockett told MSNBC in an interview. 'Communications has to be a full-on strategy.' Garcia, 47, has focused on government reform and effectiveness, a key issue for Democrats after the Trump administration's blitz across federal agencies and mass firings of federal workers by billionaire Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency. Mfume, 76, has attracted support from members impressed by his longtime stewardship of the nation's oldest civil rights group. He returned to Congress after decades leading the NAACP following the death of a previous Democratic Oversight chair, the late Congressman Elijah Cummings, a fellow Baltimore Democrat. Lynch, 70, has styled himself as the acting chair and the lawmaker best positioned to take on the committee's chairman, Republican James Comer of Kentucky. 'There are some members who speak to a very narrow audience, and that's great,' Lynch said. 'We want them to be energized and animated. But that same person is not going to go to the Rust Belt with people that are farmers, moderates, conservatives,' Lynch told The Associated Press. 'You need different voices to appeal to different constituencies.' 'I think I have a better chance of bringing back the blue-collar working people, and I have less of a chance of appealing to very younger people who are intensely invested in social media,' Lynch said. What's ahead as Democrats make their choice The vote for Oversight ranking member is scheduled for June 24 and will be conducted by secret ballot. All four candidates are speaking before multiple caucuses this week, including the New Democrats and the progressive caucus, the Congressional Black Caucus, the Congressional Hispanic Caucus and the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus. While many Democrats are undecided, others have made up their mind. Some who are privately stumping for their candidate believe it will be a tight race. That makes the public forums and private pitches even more crucial in the run-up to the vote. House progressives are divided over their preferred choice. Three members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus — Crockett, Garcia and Mfume — are vying for the ranking member seat, which makes it unlikely the caucus will back a single candidate. 'We're looking for folks that could expose this kind of corruption and hold Trump and his billionaire donors accountable,' said Rep. Greg Casar of Texas, the Progressive Caucus chair. Rep. Brad Schneider, chair of the centrist New Democrat Coalition, said he's weighing two factors: which candidate could best help Democrats win the 2026 midterm elections and whether they can successfully lead investigations into the Trump administration and 'try to repair some of the damage that's been done.' 'The committee can be a flash point, or it can be a very effective place for us to make our point, and we want to know who's going to do best in that role to make sure the committee works to help us secure 218 (members) next November,' Schneider said. The role of seniority and the Congressional Black Caucus Some Democratic caucuses have traditionally prized seniority as a clear and reliable way for lawmakers of color to rise through the ranks. There has never been a Hispanic Oversight chairman and only one Black chairman, Elijah Cummings. 'The CBC has always stood for seniority,' said Rep. Hank Johnson of Georgia. But Johnson noted that the Black Caucus has at times 'deviated' from that norm. He said many in the caucus are open to a conversation about age. 'So, Steve Lynch, I think, is the next senior member. And but as I said, other factors have to be considered and I'm sure that, along with myself, other CBC members are going through that process,' Johnson said. 'Since I've been here, seniority has had weight,' said Rep. Gregory Meeks of New York, who said he was undecided on which candidate to back. 'But seniority is not the only thing. And there are times and circumstances where the person with the most seniority has not won. Whether that's one of these times or not is what we're going to see.' ___ Associated Press writer Leah Askarinam contributed to this report.
Yahoo
14 minutes ago
- Yahoo
House Republicans draft competing budget as Senate nears deal with Hobbs
Photo by Jerod MacDonald-Evoy | Arizona Mirror Arizona lawmakers are at odds again, but this time it's the Republicans in the House of Representatives and Senate who can't agree on how to forge the state budget. Creating the state budget — deciding how much to allocate to departments, projects and initiatives or whether to fund them at all — is the most important job that legislators do each year, and the only thing they are constitutionally required to complete. Before the group of bills that will become the state budget becomes law, it must be approved by a majority in both the Arizona Senate and House — which are both controlled by Republicans — and garner a signature from Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs. In recent history, budget negotiations in Arizona have occurred behind closed doors among the governor and legislative leaders in the House and Senate. But this year is different, with Hobbs and Republican leaders in the Senate nearing a deal after weeks of negotiations. GOP leaders in the House, who haven't been involved in those talks, have responded by drafting their own budget, which was introduced late Wednesday afternoon. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX 'This is a sound, disciplined budget that delivers safe communities, strong families, and a government that lives within its means,' House Speaker Steve Montenegro said in a Wednesday evening statement. 'We're raising pay for our state law enforcement officers, reducing tuition at public universities, fully funding school choice, fixing critical infrastructure and roads, and protecting taxpayers. Our budget reins in government and puts it back to work for the people it serves.' But the spending package, which is chock-full of proposals that are unlikely to pass muster with Hobbs, will never become law. Instead, it is better viewed as a way for House Republicans to lay down a marker in order to force Hobbs and the Senate to move closer to the House's proposal. Republican political consultant Barrett Marson said House GOP leaders are hoping to demonstrate that the chamber can pass a spending plan in order to get leverage in the negotiations. 'Sometimes there's just gotta be movement to unstick a sticky situation,' he said. 'The House has an equal voice. And unlike previous years when one or both chambers had a go-it-alone ethos, the House isn't looking to be draconian or anything. They want something more responsible.' Marson said a major point of contention between the House and Senate is what to do with the budget surplus. While the Senate and Hobbs have settled on copying the novel process from 2023, in which each lawmaker was given a pot of money from the surplus that was used to fund whatever initiatives they wanted, the House wants to negotiate all of those details and not surrender control of that money to individual legislators. During a House Rules Committee meeting earlier Wednesday afternoon, House Minority Leader Oscar De Los Santos, of Laveen, said he was disappointed in the way the budgeting process was happening this year. 'We should not be moving forward with a House Republican-only budget that is destined to fail,' he said. 'This will not get signed by the governor. I don't even think it's going to pass out of the Senate.' De Los Santos even questioned whether the proposal would get enough votes to pass through the House, where Republicans hold 33 of the chamber's 60 seats. 'What we do know is that this is not a negotiated, bipartisan deal in good faith,' he said. 'House Democrats are at the table negotiating in a bipartisan way with the executive, with our (Senate) counterparts across the courtyard. That is the way to get things done in shared government.' But Republican Rep. Neal Carter, of San Tan Valley, replied that the work of governing should be done transparently, instead of in private — and that it should allow for input from the public. 'As a Republican, I stand for full transparency and not for back-room deals or negotiated budgets with parties that are somehow outside of this public process,' Carter said. The House Republican budget, introduced by House Appropriations Committee Chairman David Livingston, proposes significant changes in how federal money allocated to the state, but not restricted to specific uses, is controlled. The billions in unrestricted federal funds, currently controlled by the governor, would shift to legislative control and could only be spent on essential government services. The House GOP's budget proposal would also place new restrictions and monitoring requirements on entitlement programs, like the Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System — the state's Medicaid program — and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, formerly called food stamps. Both programs would be monitored on at least a quarterly basis for participants who don't qualify, to be kicked off. And any participants who win $3,000 or more through gambling or playing the state lottery and don't report those winnings would become ineligible. It would also give the Arizona Department of Economic Security the authority to screen recipients of Temporary Assistance for Needy Families for illegal drug use and would ban anyone who tests positive for drugs not prescribed to them from the cash assistance program for a year. House Republicans also intend to increase the percentage of money spent in K-12 classrooms, as opposed to on administration; to decrease tuition for students attending the state's three public universities; and to ban those universities from using public or private money to give scholarships to students without legal immigration status. Hobbs introduced her budget proposal, which includes a much different list of priorities, back in January. Shortly after that, Livingston and Rep. Matt Gress, R-Phoenix, panned her proposal for leaving out projected cost increases for programs like AHCCCS. Hobbs spokesman Christian Slater told the Arizona Mirror on Wednesday that Livingston and Gress were to blame for the House's lack of collaboration on the budget. 'This is DDD all over again,' Slater said via email, referring to a fight earlier this year over funding for the Department of Developmental Disabilities. 'It's another circus led by the Speaker, David Livingston, and Matt Gress where they have refused to participate with any caucuses, including their Republican counterparts in the Senate, in a meaningful manner and are once again just trying to score some political points even though they know their plan is going absolutely nowhere.' Livingston and Gress, a former budget director for Republican Gov. Doug Ducey, were both key players in the fight over an extra $122 million in emergency funding for DDD that put vital services for the developmentally disabled in jeopardy. 'Rather than being productive, the House Republican leadership continues to show they are in over their head and unserious about governing,' Slater said. The House Appropriations Committee is set to discuss the proposal Thursday morning. The Senate Republicans have not introduced their budget proposal. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE