House bill would impose harsh new penalties on protesters and their organizations

Protesters in downtown Columbus . Photo by Susan Tebben.

By Marty Schladen

Ohio Capital Journal

In the wake of this summer’s massive civil-rights protests, two Republicans in the Ohio House have filed a bill that imposes harsh new penalties on certain protest-related activities. The bill even goes so far as to allow people to kill protesters if they feel threatened by them.

The sponsors of the legislation say it isn’t aimed at curtailing people’s right to protest. Instead, they say, it would protect the public while simultaneously protecting the First Amendment right to free speech.

“Freedom of speech and freedom of assembly are important cornerstones of our democracy,” one sponsor, Rep. Cindy Abrams, R-Harrison, said in a statement. “This legislation embraces the right of all Americans to peacefully assemble and make their voice heard in the public arena while supporting first responders, law enforcement, small businesses and law-abiding Ohioans.”

However, the bill has some similarities to one passed last year by the Ohio Senate. Critics say that legislation — Senate Bill 33 — uses vague language and stiff financial penalties in an attempt to intimidate organizations from supporting protests in the first place.

For example, the word “tamper” is loosely defined in SB 33 while it imposes harsh penalties on people who tamper with others’ property. The legislation also would allow triple financial damages against organizations alleged tamperers belong to — regardless of whether the organization had any foreknowledge of the activity.

Similarly, House Bill 784, the measure filed last week in the House, relies heavily on the term “riot.” Yet it is only loosely defined in Ohio law as “participating with four or more others in a course of disorderly conduct…”

The new legislation appears to be in response to this year’s protests against the police killing of George Floyd. In Ohio, some of the demonstrations resulted in smashed windows, looting and other property damage, though a study shows more than 95% were peaceful.

“When businesses are boarded up and shut down as a result of the actions of a few agitators, law-abiding Ohioans lose, small businesses lose, and jobs are lost,” Rep. Sara Carruthers, R-Hamilton, a cosponsor, said in a statement. “This is a commonsense bill that supports the right to peacefully assemble while holding accountable those who break the law.”

It seems, however, to go beyond that in important respects. 

For example, it says that if a law enforcement officer is injured in a protest, “an organization that provides material support or resources… is responsible for that conduct and liable to the peace officer in treble the amount of damages sustained as a result of the conduct.”

Similar language in SB 33, (State Senator Theresa Gavarone is a co-sponsor) was interpreted by environmental organizations as an attempt to intimidate them from supporting actions such as pipeline protests by threatening them with financial ruin.

Also, while the bill creates avenues for injured police officers to sue protesters and organizations, it is silent about police misconduct during protests. 

Nationally, the news organization ProPublica in July reviewed 400 social media posts regarding police conduct during protests “and found troubling conduct by officers in at least 184 of them. In 59 videos, pepper spray and tear gas were used improperly; in a dozen others, officers used batons to strike noncombative demonstrators; and in 87 videos, officers punched, pushed and kicked retreating protesters, including a few instances in which they used an arm or knee to exert pressure on a protester’s neck.”

Similar incidents were reported in Ohio, including a June incident in which officers with the Columbus Police Department pepper-sprayed reporters with the Ohio State paper, The Lantern, who had clearly identified themselves as journalists.

Abrams, Carruthers and a spokeswoman for the House Republican Caucus didn’t respond to questions for this story. But a free-speech activist said the intent of HB 784 is to stifle it.

“With numerous other lame duck priorities facing Ohio and during a worsening global pandemic, House Republicans choose to concentrate on a dangerous, unneeded, and unconstitutional bill encouraging and endorsing vigilante actions,” Gary Daniels, chief lobbyist for the American Civil Liberties Union of Ohio said in an email. “The clear goal of HB 784 is to distract constituents from actual problems needing solutions and swirling Statehouse scandals.”

Among the provisions in the bill:

  • New penalties for blocking traffic — Now generally a misdemeanor, doing so during an unpermitted protest would be a third-degree felony carrying a maximum fine of $10,000 and a maximum sentence of three years in prison.
  • Increases penalties for “riot” and “aggravated riot” if there is property damage and creates a new crime called “riot vandalism” — Under the bill, the penalty for riot would now be a fourth-degree felony punishable by 18 months in jail and a $5,000 fine, while aggravated riot would be a third-degree felony. Damage to government property or gravestones during a demonstration would be “riot vandalism,” a second-degree felony, punishable by up to eight years in prison and a $15,000 fine. 
  • Creates a new crime called “riot assault” — It says that if someone participating in a riot “recklessly” causes harm to another, the person causing harm is guilty of a fifth-degree felony, punishable by up to a year in prison and a $2,500 fine. If the person harmed is a police officer, the penalty is a third-degree felony.

Perhaps most strikingly, HB 784 creates a sort of stand-your-ground right during protests. It says “a person who reasonably believes that the person is in danger of imminent bodily harm may take any steps necessary to flee or escape from persons engaged in aggravated riot or riot… and is justified in using or threatening to use reasonable force, including deadly force, to escape the aggravated riot or riot.”

In at least that respect, it’s similar to legislation proposed last week by Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis that would expand that state’s stand-your-ground law.

Among the questions that HB 784’s sponsors didn’t respond to was whether they knew of any real-world examples showing why it’s necessary to allow deadly force during what they term “riots.” They also didn’t respond when asked whether the provision was a recipe for violence by encouraging armed people to attend protests.

***

School cases grow in Ohio counties

The state has ballooned with COVID-19 cases, and schools have reported their own increases in student cases, some hitting triple digits.

Delaware County’s Olentangy Local Schools has seen the most total cases as of the most recent state schools report, released on Thursday, with 125 reported COVID-19 cases since reporting began.

As of Friday afternoon, the state has reported a total of 20,694 cases in children (both school age and younger), 343 hospitalizations and three deaths.

Children ages 14 to 17 hold the largest percentage of cases in children, with 45%. READ MORE

DeWine again caught in middle of tug-of-war over COVID-19 response

Ohio has reached another crossroads in the battle against COVID-19. 

Gov. Mike DeWine is once again caught in the middle as the state repeatedly sets new records for virus cases and hospitalizations. After months of a decentralized approach and emphasis on personal responsibility, DeWine now says Ohio faces “a monumental crisis.”

As much as the governor has implored Ohioans to come together in fighting this pandemic, the Ohio Statehouse remains as polarized on the subject as ever. Within the private sector, the specter of more closures is already facing backlash from industry leaders who fear the economic devastation of shuttering businesses a second time — this time in the absence of government stimulus checks or forgivable PPP loans to aid with payroll costs.  READ MORE