Our View

Our View

Hutchinson veto of anti-unlawful picketing bill a misstep

Gov. Asa Hutchinson’s veto of a Senate bill aimed at addressing the growing problem of unlawful mass picketing and civil disobedience based on what he said was a restriction of free speech and the right to assemble is certainly disappointing.

We say that in light of the fact if Hutchinson had an issue over this bill being “overbroad and vague” then why didn’t we hear an attempt on his part of reaching out to the bill’s sponsor, Sen. Trent Garner, R-El Dorado, in an attempt to address his concerns.

Hutchinson said the bill “fails to identify bright-line differentiation between constitutionally protected activity and activity subject to the penalties outlined in the bill. In short.”

SB550 would define “mass picketing” as the assembly of people in the use of pickets or demonstrations at or near a business, school or private facility.

A person would have committed the offense of unlawful mass picketing if the person knowingly engaged in mass picketing that obstructed access to the pursuit of lawful work or employment or obstructed the entrance or exit from a workplace or the free use of public roads, streets, highways, railways, airports or other right-ofway of travel or conveyance. The definition of the crime also included involvement in mass picketing that obstructed the entrance or exit from a private residence or included a threat of violence or intimidation in the vicinity of that residence.

Hutchinson said in his letter to the Senate that the description of mass picketing fails to sufficiently provide the public or law enforcement with the parameters under which the statute would be utilized.

“The bill would provide an opportunity for law enforcement to apply criminal statutes to public assembly and, in being vague in its definition, could impede the exercise of constitutional rights,” the governor said. Well, if that is the case, why weren’t these concerns addressed when the bill was drafted or revised during his process through the Senate and the House?

The message we get from this is Hutchinson never intended to support this bill especially after making it known the core issues that SB550 attempts to address are already provided for in existing state law for disruptive conduct under Arkansas Code Annotated 10-2-110, obstructing governmental, operations under Arkansas Code Annotated 5-54-102, disruption of campus activities under Arkansas Code Annotated 5-71-226 and obstructing emergency medical personnel under Arkansas Code Annotated 5-60-123.

Naturally, the Arkansas chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union described the bill as part of a wave of anti-protest bills that has swept the nation, which is certainly understandable.

Incidents such as People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals blocking access to downtown office building in Little Rock, a group blocking access to the Interstate 40 bridge in Memphis, “the Occupy Wall Street bunch”, as well as all the illegal and destructive actions of Black Lives Matters have given legitimate reason for tougher mass protesting laws.

It is for these reasons there needs to be enhanced laws on the books to effectively deal with illegal and destructive activities being caused by radical groups that clearly abuse the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Gov. Hutchinson’s veto action had definitely sent the wrong message in dealing with a growing problem that is definitely infringing on the rights of the law-abiding citizens.