DNC ‘Protest Decriminalization’ Bill to Be Amended Over First Amendment Concerns

democratic-national-convent

Image: Philly.HappeningMag.com

By Dustin Slaughter

Editor’s note: On June 23rd, Mayor Jim Kenney signed into law this ordinance with the amendment intact.

The city’s lauded ‘protest decriminalization’ bill introduced by the Kenney administration ahead of July’s Democratic National Convention – and on the heels of a MacArthur Foundation grant which the city hopes will assist in reducing Philadelphia’s jail population – will be amended before it goes up for a vote due to First Amendment concerns, The Declaration has learned.

A spokesperson for Councilwoman Helen Gym confirmed yesterday that she has asked to include in the bill “an explicit protection for purely First Amendment activities.”

Councilman Curtis Jones, who co-sponsored the bill at the request of the Kenney administration, and who chairs the public safety committee , indicated he is in favor of the amendment. It is expected to be added today.

In its current form, the proposed legislation would penalize activity commonly associated with protests as civil offenses, giving police the option to fine demonstrators $100 instead of arresting and charging them criminally.

Here’s the rub: the state’s statute dealing with ‘Obstructing highways and other public passages’ includes the following clause, which civil rights attorneys in Philly have largely relied on for defending their clients’ First Amendment activity:

“No person shall be deemed guilty of an offense under this subsection solely because of a gathering of persons to hear him speak or otherwise communicate, or solely because of being a member of such a gathering.”

While the city’s proposed ordinance includes the state code’s language nearly verbatim, the above passage is excluded entirely in the current bill.

Officials from the Philadelphia Police Department, Managing Director’s Office, and city Law Department helped craft the bill, according to Kenney spokeswoman Lauren Hitt.

“We also gave the proposed legislation to Courts, DA & [Public] Defenders before it was submitted so they could request changes if they wanted,” she said.

City spokesperson Mike Dunn called the omission “an oversight”, adding that the administration will support today’s amendment.

Lloyd Long III, a Philadelphia attorney who has represented defendants and plaintiffs in numerous civil rights cases, characterized the ordinance as being a “’round-up’ clause.”

“It allows police to take speakers and listeners into custody and clear the streets. After realizing that charges cannot stand under the Crimes Code because of the above clause, all that needs to be done to ‘justify’ the detainment is to issue a ticket under the ordinance.”

His firm reviewed the bill yesterday and brought their concerns to the attention of Council members.

A 2013 National Lawyers Guild report noted that ‘special ordinances’ have become “common practice for cities hosting [National Special Security Events].”

The report also notes that these ordinances frequently “institute a special permitting process for political demonstrations, designate security perimeters, and restrict specific items and actions within those perimeters.”

Editor’s note: In the interest of full disclosure, Dustin Slaughter is employed at Mr. Long’s firm.

Read the bill below:

If you enjoyed this story, please donate to the Declaration to support more investigative journalism like this.

Donate Button with Credit Cards

If you cannot view our donate buttons because of your browser security settings, please donate here.

Advertisements

There are 3 comments

  1. Iden

    What isn’t explicit in your writing here is whether this means the police are more or less likely to round ppl up because they are in the street and then ticket them and release immediately or hold the release for later. And how would this literally work with a fairly large number of ppl at one time?

    Like

    1. Dustin Slaughter

      Thanks for commenting, Iden. First: It wasn’t “explicit” because there’s no way of knowing whether or not they will round up demonstrators until they do. The police are going to do whatever they feel like doing. Second: the point is the amendment would at least provide attorneys with an adequate argument for why protesters were not violating the statute, whether or not police immediately ticket and release or detain, ticket, and release later.

      Like

  2. Tacitus

    Cha- ching!!! Hear the Government registers ring !!!

    1st Amendment tax.

    In the Cradle Of Liberty.

    How about we throw the fucking communist bag of shit Kenney into the river for starters.

    Don’t worry, all stolen monies will be used for …the children. Just like the regressive cigarette tax. And the soon to come regressive tax on “sugary” drinks.
    And the still here after all these great years..”temporary” Johnstown flood tax.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s