Latest news with #PEACEAct
Yahoo
15-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
What Tennessee's PEACE Act means for free speech
Tennessee's new Protecting Everyone Against Crime and Extremism Act (PEACE Act) law limits approaching police officers and is a threat to First Amendment freedoms. (Photo: John Partipilo/Tennessee Lookout) A new Tennessee law with the unassuming acronym 'PEACE' might appear, on the surface, to be a mundane update to the state's criminal code. But tucked into the legislation's language is a clear and deliberate threat to the First Amendment freedoms of Tennesseans. On Friday, Gov. Bill Lee signed Senate Bill 30, the Protecting Everyone Against Crime and Extremism Act (PEACE Act).The law makes it a criminal offense to leave 'unsolicited flyers' on public or private property, hang signs from overpasses and bridges, ride in the back of a box truck, refuse to give one's name or give a false name to law enforcement, and approach within 25 feet of an officer after being ordered to stop or retreat. While these provisions might sound like routine penalties for littering, limits on approaching police officers and tweaks to law enforcement powers, they raise serious First Amendment concerns. One of the most troubling aspects of the law is its expansion of the state's intimidation law to criminalize acts like handing out flyers or trespassing if done with the 'intent to intimidate' someone from exercising their rights. This language is dangerously vague, and that's exactly the problem. 'Intent to intimidate' is not clearly defined and can easily be used to target protestors, demonstrators, or anyone expressing dissent in a way that makes someone uncomfortable. Bill expanding Tennessee law enforcement powers during protests draws pushback Additionally, the law classifies dropping 'unsolicited flyers' on private or public property as 'littering,' which means a political pamphlet left on a doorstep could potentially lead to a criminal charge. The Supreme Court has long held that leafleting is protected speech, not trash. In Lovell v. City of Griffin (1938), Schneider v. State (1939), Talley v California (1960) and Watchtower v. Village of Stratton (2002), the Court affirmed that the right to distribute printed material, especially for political or religious purposes, lies at the heart of the First Amendment. The Tennessee law's new provisions also prohibit approaching within 25 feet of a law enforcement officer after being ordered to stop. Although the amended version narrows this to active crime scenes, traffic stops, or public safety threats, it still violates the public's right to record and monitor police conduct in public spaces. Federal courts have increasingly recognized this right as an essential check on government power. In Glik v. Cunniffe (2011), the First Circuit wrote that '[t]he filming of government officials engaged in their duties in a public place… fits comfortably' within the principles of protected First Amendment expression. As if these aspects of the law were not concerning enough, it also grants police broader authority to arrest individuals for misdemeanors not committed in their presence and provides legal immunity to officers who decide later not to issue citations for these alleged offenses. In combination with the new criminal categories for expressive conduct, this gives law enforcement a wide berth to intimidate and arrest peaceful demonstrators, especially in politically charged settings. Legal advocates have tracked similar efforts around the country where these minor offenses are not used against litterers and loiters but as a means to shut down protests. This would give the government wider latitude to target speech that the party in power doesn't like, from climate activists to pro-life protestors to labor union strikes. Supporters of this law may argue that these provisions promote public order or protect communities from hate. But the First Amendment does not allow the government to punish speech simply because it is offensive or hateful. The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that even the most disturbing or bigoted speech is protected unless it is intended and likely to provoke imminent lawless action, amounts to a true threat, or defamation. Laws that target speech based on the speaker's motive or viewpoint and give broad discretion to law enforcement violate fundamental constitutional principles. The PEACE Act presents significant risks of overreach and is likely to face constitutional challenges in court. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
30-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee should veto PEACE Act and protect First Amendment rights
The Constitution demands that Tennessee's government tolerate hateful speech. We might not agree with what someone says, but American civil liberties hinge on us defending the right to say it. The Constitution's threshold for laws restricting speech is quite high, and Tennessee House Bill 55/Senate Bill 30, also known as the Protecting Everyone Against Crime and Extremism (PEACE) Act, needs some work. Gov. Bill Lee should send it back to the drawing board. In 2024, demonstrations by hate groups included distributed anti-Jewish literature to synagogue congregants and holding signs with hateful messages on an overpass. Such speech and behavior in question deserve our condemnation, but we should be cautious about government restraint. The PEACE Act, sponsored by State House Majority Leader William Lamberth, R-Portland, and State Sen. Mark Pody, R-Lebanon, creates a new Class A misdemeanor for littering and trespassing with hateful intent to 'unlawfully intimidate another from the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured by the constitution or laws of the state of Tennessee.' I spoke to Lamberth about his motives for introducing the measure. 'Tennessee is a law-and-order state, and we're committed to protecting our citizens' safety,' he said. 'The PEACE Act aims to deter hate crimes by giving law enforcement additional tools to ensure that individuals who harass or target others based on their identity or beliefs are held accountable.' The PEACE Act criminalizes conduct that is somewhere between common misdemeanors and a full-blown felony. The endeavor walks a fine line between content-neutral laws that limit political protests to certain times, places and manners and content-based restrictions that rarely survive legal review. Opinion: NYT's Thomas Friedman is wrong. Don't let politicians steal American optimism. | Opinion Littering and trespassing are already crimes because they infringe on the right to enjoy public spaces and own private property. Lamberth insists that legislators must address a gap in Tennessee law. 'Yes, littering and trespassing are already criminal offenses,' he said. 'The PEACE ACT simply adds a Class A misdemeanor offense when the act is deliberately intended to intimidate or prevent someone from exercising their civil rights, such as religious freedom or ability to vote.' If the aggravating factor for enhancing litter and trespass into another crime is speech, then speech is effectively being criminalized. That won't pass constitutional muster. As drafted, one discarded flyer with hateful intent might be enough to charge the enhanced crime. A better path would be creating a civil cause of action for individuals who are victimized by such hateful conduct to sue the perpetrators and anyone who might be backing them financially for damages. It's a fair way to compensate folks for harm and determine the difference between littering and activity that is far more insidious. HB55 also creates the right for law enforcement to create a 25-foot buffer zone 'in the execution of the officer's official duties after the officer has ordered the person to stop approaching or to retreat.' The original language was so broad that any on-duty officer would have the ability to create a 25-foot buffer zone at will. The amended bill before Lee adds the requirement that the official duties involve a traffic stop, investigation of a crime, or an ongoing and immediate threat to public safety. This change is a major improvement. Officers shouldn't have to worry about crowd control while arresting an individual or issuing a citation. Opinion: She took on Neo Nazis and hate groups. Nashville Council Member Zulfat Suara is a boss 'You can be present, say and record anything you want - that is your constitutional right,' said Lamberth, 'but you can't hinder or interfere when a police officer is carrying out their official duties.' The last provision of the bill that warrants discussion is criminalizing 'attaching a sign, signal or other marking to a bridge, overpass, or tunnel.' The offense would become a Class B misdemeanor. Obviously, the state has the constitutional power to regulate signage, but the provision seems focused on a particular fact pattern instead of general applicability. Do Tennesseans need government permission to welcome home a veteran with a banner along a bridge? Lamberth's perspective on such signage is clear. 'Hanging signs over bridges and overpasses can cover existing signage and only serves as a distraction that puts everyone on the road at risk,' he said. The PEACE Act undeniably improved over the legislative session, but lawmakers and the governor have an obligation to protect our civil liberties over our momentary discomfort. The state government cannot and should not insulate us from speech which makes us uncomfortable or with which we disagree. As such, the Peace Act needs another look before becoming law. USA TODAY Network Tennessee Columnist Cameron Smith is a Memphis-born, Brentwood-raised recovering political attorney raising four boys in Nolensville, Tennessee, with his particularly patient wife, Justine. Direct outrage or agreement to or @DCameronSmith on Twitter. Agree or disagree? Send a letter to the editor to letters@ This article originally appeared on Nashville Tennessean: Tennessee PEACE Act is misguided bill and quells free speech | Opinion
Yahoo
22-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
PEACE Act aimed at stopping hate heads to Tennessee governor's desk
NASHVILLE, Tenn. (WKRN) — A bill aimed at stopping hate passed the House floor Monday and now heads to Gov. Bill Lee's desk. The Protecting Everyone Against Crime and Extremism (PEACE) Act stems from the Neo-Nazi marches in downtown Nashville and the targeting of a synagogue by anti-Semitic groups last year. The bill would make it illegal to leave hate-filled flyers in neighborhoods, hang banners from overpasses and bridges, ride in the back of a box truck, refuse to give one's name or give the wrong name to police, and getting within 25 feet of an officer after being asked to back up. Sen. Mark Pody (R-Lebanon) told News 2 in January that he started working on the PEACE Act last July and met with Republicans, Democrats, police, the Davidson County District Attorney, Jewish community leaders, and others to get their feedback. 📧 Have breaking news come to you: → 'When there are protests and such, I want to protect their First Amendment right that they can protest, they can do it, but they have to do it in a respectful and peaceful way,' Sen. Pody said. 'There shouldn't be discrimination from anybody.' While the bill is focused on peace, lawmakers' debate on the House floor Monday became anything but when Rep. Justin Jones (D-Nashville) blamed House Majority Leader William Lamberth (R-Portland) for making Neo-Nazis feel welcome in the state. 'On October 2022, you stood with the Proud Boys outside this Capitol, a hate group that we are targeting. Do you take responsibility, Rep. William Lamberth, for welcoming hate groups to Tennessee?' Rep. Jones said. 'You don't need a policy; a law. What you need is a mirror. The reality is there is a certain reason white nationalists feel welcome in Tennessee, and a lot of it has to do with the agenda you pushed as the leader of your party.' Leader Lamberth, the bill's House sponsor, fired back at Jones, calling the term 'white nationalist' racist itself. 'Every time you say white nationalist, it's a racist comment. You're seeing someone based on their ethnicity. It's absolutely 100% racist. When you say nationalist, you speak against Americans who have died for this country. You may not realize this, but every time you say that, you define your fellow Americans and Tennesseans through a racist lens. I stand against racism. I wish you would join us in that,' Leader Lamberth said. 'You may hate every white person, but the rest of us will not stand for racism in this state.' Republican lawmakers erupted with cheers. Rep. Jones' microphone was then cut off by the Speaker of the House. 'Calling out racism does not make you racist…' Jones said before his mic was muted. In addition, Rep. Aftyn Behn (D-Nashville) argued the bill would criminalize protest and expand police power. She pointed out, had the PEACE Act been in effect in Minneapolis in May 2020, the woman who recorded the George Floyd incident would have been 'retroactively thrown in jail.' 'Not only is this bill unconstitutional, but yet you have not included exemptions…' ⏩ The bill passed the House and heads to the governor's desk. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
