|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
On Wednesday, the Alabama House Public Safety and Homeland Security Committee held a public hearing on HB224, a bill introduced by Rep. Allen Treadaway, R-District 51, that would expand the definition of “obstructing governmental operations” to include any instance where a person “intentionally approaches or remains within 25 feet of a first responder after being ordered to not approach or to vacate the area and impedes, threatens, or harasses the first responder.”
Under current law, obstructing governmental operations is a Class A misdemeanor which is only committed when a person “uses unlawful means to intentionally obstruct, impair, or hinder a government function or a public servant.”
Camille Bennett, the founder and director of Project Say Something, an Alabama-based nonprofit focused on racial justice issues, spoke in opposition of the bill.
Bennett called the bill redundant and referenced other sections of Alabama law which already exist to protect the rights of public servants. “HB224’s substitution is more restrictive than the current code and will violate the first amendment rights of protestors,” Bennett told the committee.
“The synopsis of the bill… is more restrictive than the current code because it clearly states that an individual cannot come within [25] feet of any governmental official if an official gives warning. This language makes protest impossible,” Bennett continued. “How can a public servant accurately measure 25 feet and carry around a bullhorn instructing protestors to disperse in real time?”
Bennett also noted that the terms used in the bill are vague, giving public servants wide discretion when determining what they consider to be “abuse,” “obscenity,” or “harassment.”
“HB224 also states that individuals cannot ‘harass’ the first responder or any public servant. This language is vague, restrictive, and left to the discretion of any public servant,” Bennett stated.
Everette Johnson, president of the Alabama State Fraternal Order of Police, spoke in support of the bill. Johnson claimed that the bill would help to alleviate increased violence against police in the state.
“This will provide protection not just for law enforcement but for public servants as a whole, to allow a safe space for those officers to work and those public safety officials to work, to do the job that we ask them to do,” Johnson said.
Johnson claimed that the bill also protects citizens, mentioning a hypothetical scenario in which a crowd gathers around an officer who is performing an arrest, only for the arrestee to grab that officer’s weapon and then put the crowd in harm’s way.
Rep. Chris England, D-Tuscaloosa, called the legislation “troublesome,” saying that the bill gives too much discretion to a law enforcement officer, allowing them to arrest someone for a simple comment that the officer may deem “obscene.” England also noted that the other provisions of the bill, such as making a verbal threat or assaulting a public servant, are already crimes under the law.
Rep. Russell Bedsole, R-District 49, who is himself a law enforcement officer, agreed with Rep. England.
“I understand in my career… we have been trained to take some verbal abuse at times… the verbal abuse just kind of comes with the territory as long as your’e not interfering with my ability to do my job,” Bedsole said.
Rep. Thomas Jackson, D-District 68, echoed Camille Bennett’s concerns, saying that the bill “really eliminates protests, lawful protests.”
Jackson also noted that the bill could have the unintended consequence of reducing accountability for police officers and protecting instances of police brutality from public scrutiny.
“If it hadn’t been for that young lady in Minnesota that had a phone recording George Floyd’s murder, it never would’ve became public if this kind of law was in place,” Jackson said.
“[Officers] have to learn how to deal with the public, and if we’ve got hot-headed people in blue who are, matter of fact, manifesting issues rather than trying to resolve them, I can see this bill is not being very productive or helpful,” he continued.
Police brutality and police-instigated violence are indeed issues in Alabama. The state has a meager score of 52 out of 100 percent on Police Scorecard, largely due to state law enforcement’s outsized use of force — including the use of deadly force on unarmed individuals. Police departments in some Alabama municipalities, like Decatur and Hanceville, have also faced intense controversy related to corruption and misconduct.
Rep. Treadaway denied that his bill would impede the ability for civilians to protest or that it would limit accountability for law enforcement. He referred to police brutality, like that which killed “John Floyd (sic),” as the result of one or two “bad apples.”
Treadaway said he would consider working with his fellow representatives to create amendments that might address their concerns with the bill’s abusive and obscene language provisions.
To that effect, Rep. England expressed to Treadaway and the rest of the committee that it is their duty to ensure that bills like HB224 do not reduce accountability for law enforcement.
“It’s our responsibility to not only make sure that law enforcement officers are safe, but that we also create an environment for accountability because we don’t want people to believe on the side of the road that they won’t have redress and they end up taking things into their own hands,” England added. “I think we need to maintain that balance so people know that the mission is to protect and serve and that when officers get outside of those bounds that we also have the ability to hold them accountable.”
The committee is set to vote on HB224 — potentially with some additional amendments — at their next meeting.
