US Protest Law Tracker

The US Protest Law Tracker follows state and federal legislation introduced since January 2017 that restricts the right to peaceful assembly. For more information, visit our Analysis of US Anti-Protest Bills page.

45 states have
considered
289 bills
42 enacted 28 pending

No initiatives
Pending, defeated or expired initiatives
Enacted initiatives

Legislation

Latest updates: Mar. 27, 2024 (West Virginia), Mar. 13, 2024 (Florida), Mar. 10, 2024 (Kentucky)
Filter by:
Locations
Status
Issues
Date

Locations

Status

Issues

Introduction Date

from

to

Type

or
X

12 entries matching in provided filters in 8 states. Clear all filters
Alaska

HB 386 / SB 255: New penalties for protesting in the street and other public places without a permit

Would introduce new criminal and civil penalties that could cover protesters who demonstrate in street and other public places without a permit. The bill creates a new offense of “obstruction of free passage in public places,” to apply if someone “knowingly renders a public place impassable or passable only with unreasonable inconvenience or hazard.” While it includes exceptions for “obstruction” authorized by a permit or otherwise authorized by the law or a person “in charge of” the premises, the new offense would clearly cover unpermitted protests—particularly large protests in public plazas, parks, streets or other places that might make it “unreasonably inconvenient” for other individuals or cars to pass. If the protest “substantially interferes” with someone’s access to a government building, or “interferes” with an emergency responder, the offense would be a Class A misdemeanor, punishable by up to a year in jail and $25,000. In all other cases it would be a Class B misdemeanor, punishable by 90 days in jail and $2,000. In addition to criminal penalties, the bill creates expansive civil liability for protesters who block public places. A person “whose passage is obstructed” could sue a protester for $10,000 if their rights were infringed, $50,000 if their property was damaged, and $100,000 if they were personally injured – in addition to attorney’s fees and costs. Under the bill, civil liability extends to anyone who “directly or indirectly, by words or action, aids, encourages, or authorizes the conduct,” or “conspires” to engage in the conduct. It also extends to anyone outside the state of Alaska if they “knew or had reason to know” that their acts were likely to lead to the obstruction. Finally, the bill substantially increases the penalty for trespassing if it creates a substantial risk of physical injury, or “interferes with” an “emergency response.” First degree trespass, which includes entering onto property with intent to violate a law, would be a Class C felony in such cases, punishable by five years in prison and $50,000, rather than a Class A misdemeanor. As such, protesters who for instance enter onto private property to engage in peaceful civil disobedience could face felony penalties.

(See full text of bill here)

Status: pending

Introduced 21 Feb 2024.

Issue(s): Damage Costs, Conspiracy, Traffic Interference, Trespass

return to map
Arizona

SB 1073: Heightened penalties for protesters who block traffic

Would create a new felony offense that could cover protesters who demonstrate on highways and certain other public roads. Under the bill, protesters who intentionally interfere with passage on a highway, bridge, tunnel, or any road leading to an airport if there are 25 or more cars or people on it, after being verbally warned to desist, could be guilty of a Class 6 felony, punishable by up to 5.75 years in prison. Arizona law already provides serious misdemeanor penalties, which can include jail time, for offenses related to “recklessly interfer[ing]” with traffic by “creating an unreasonable inconvenience or hazard.” The bill’s sponsor said that protesters who blocked a bridge during their demonstration for a ceasefire in Gaza inspired his bill.

(See full text of bill here)

Status: pending

Introduced 16 Jan 2024; Approved by Senate 31 January 2024

Issue(s): Traffic Interference

return to map
Missouri

HB 2218: Imposing costs of protest damage on organizers and sponsors

Would create new civil cause of action against any person who “sponsors or organizes” a protest or demonstration that causes property or personal damage. Under the bill, if a protest results in property damage, or if it blocks a highway or emergency vehicle, resulting in property damage or personal injury, “any person” who sponsored or organized the protest is liable for damage costs. The bill does not require that the organizer or sponsor have any role in causing the damage or injury, or any intent or knowledge that damage or injury would occur during the protest, in order to be liable.

(See full text of bill here)

Status: pending

Introduced 4 Jan 2024.

Issue(s): Damage Costs, Traffic Interference

return to map
New Jersey

S 834 / A 3489: NEW PENALTIES FOR BLOCKING TRAFFIC AND OTHER PROTEST-ADJACENT CONDUCT

Would make it a felony offense to purposely or recklessly obstruct a public road while engaging in "disorderly conduct" or a "riot," punishable by up to a year and a half in prison and a $10,000 fine. Both "disorderly conduct" and "riot" are defined broadly under New Jersey law: "Disorderly conduct," for instance, could include "recklessly creating a risk of public inconvenience" by causing a "hazardous condition," or using "unreasonably loud and offensively coarse" language in a public place. The bill would also broaden the definition of "riot," such that a group of five or more people who engage in "disorderly conduct" and cause any damage to property or persons could face riot charges, a felony punishable by up to five years in prison and $15,000. Individuals who deface a monument during an unruly protest would also face heightened penalties under the bill: Current law penalizes defacing or damaging any public monument or structure as a disorderly persons offense, subject to six months in jail. The bill would make the same offense a felony punishable by a year and a half in prison and $10,000, if committed during a "riot." The bill would create new sanctions for protest organizers and patrons, as well: Under the bill, a person who "conspires with others as an organizer, supervisor, financier or manager to commit" one of a number of crimes during a protest would be guilty of "promotion of violent, disorderly assembly" and face enhanced criminal penalties. The text was introduced as S3261 during the 2020-2021 session, and as S1783/A4577 during the 2022-2023 session.

(See full text of bill here)

Status: pending

Introduced 9 Jan 2024.

Issue(s): Conspiracy, Riot, Traffic Interference

return to map
New Jersey

S 652: HEIGHTENED PENALTIES FOR BLOCKING TRAFFIC, RIOT, DISORDERLY CONDUCT, AND RELATED OFFENSES

Would make it a felony offense to purposely or recklessly obstruct a public road while engaging in "disorderly conduct" or a "riot," punishable by up to 18 months in prison and a $10,000 fine. Both "disorderly conduct" and "riot" are defined broadly under New Jersey law: "Disorderly conduct," for instance, could include "recklessly creating a risk" of "public inconvenience" by causing a "hazardous condition," or using "unreasonably loud and offensively coarse" language in a public place. The bill would also broaden the definition of "riot," such that a group of seven or more people who engage in "disorderly conduct" and cause any damage to property could face riot charges, a felony punishable by up to five years in prison and $15,000. The bill would create a new felony offense for disorderly conduct in a "place of public accommodation" that is committed during a "riot." It would also establish a felony offense for chalking or using graffiti on a public monument during an unruly protest: Current law penalizes purposely defacing or damaging any public monument or structure as a disorderly persons offense, subject to six months in jail. The bill would make the same offense a felony punishable by a year and a half in prison and $10,000, if committed during a "riot." The same bill was proposed as S84/A456 in the 2022-2023 session. 

(See full text of bill here)

Status: pending

Introduced 9 Jan 2024.

Issue(s): Riot, Traffic Interference

return to map
New Jersey

S 399: EXPANDED "RIOT" DEFINITION, NEW PENALTIES FOR "INCITEMENT TO RIOT", AND NEW LEGAL DEFENSE FOR PEOPLE WHO HURT PROTESTERS

Would expand the legal definition of "riot," a third degree offense under the bill, to include any group of three or more individuals whose shared intent to engage in disorderly and violent conduct results in "imminent danger" of property damage or personal injury, or actual damage or injury. Notably, the new definition does not require that the individuals' conduct be disorderly or violent, or that they commit any actual damage or injury. Under the bill, a "riot" consisting of 25 or more people, or one that "endangers the safe movement of a vehicle," is automatically an "aggravated riot," a new crime of the second degree under the bill. As such, large groups of protesters or ones that block traffic, even temporarily, could face up to 10 years in prison, a fine of up to $150,000, or both. Under the bill, "inciting" someone to participate in a riot is a crime of the third degree, punishable by 5 years in prison. "Aggravated incitement," which results if there is property damage over $5,000 is a crime of the second degree, punishable by up to 10 years in prison. The bill also creates a new criminal offense of "mob intimidation," defined as a group of three or more people who act with a "common intent" to compel "or attempt to compel" another person to "do or refrain from doing any act," or "assume, abandon, or maintain a particular viewpoint" against their will. The offense is punishable by up to 6 months in jail and a $1,000 fine. The bill could also encourage violence against protesters by creating a new affirmative defense in civil lawsuits for personal injury, death, or property damage, such that a defendant could avoid liability by establishing that the injury, death, or damage they committed "arose from" conduct by someone "acting in furtherance of a riot." Finally, the bill creates a new civil right of action against a municipal government that fails to provide "respond appropriately to protect persons and property during a riot or unlawful assembly," making them civilly liable for damages, including personal injury or property damage. These provisions, if enacted, could encourage municipal governments to adopt overly aggressive law enforcement responses to protests in order to avoid lawsuits. The same bill was proposed as S3992 in the 2020-2021 session, and as S1206 in the 2022-2023 session.

(See full text of bill here)

Status: pending

Introduced 9 Jan 2024.

Issue(s): Driver Immunity, Riot, Traffic Interference, State Liability, Stand Your Ground

return to map
New York

S 8646: New penalties for protesters who block traffic

Would create a new criminal offense that could cover unpermitted protests and demonstrations on streets, sidewalks, or near public buildings. According to the bill, a person participating in a protest without a permit who “obstructs” cars or pedestrians, or prevents people from entering or exiting buildings, commits a new offense of “aggravated disorderly conduct” if they intend “to cause public inconvenience, annoyance or alarm” or are “recklessly creating a risk thereof.” The offense would be a class A misdemeanor, punishable by one year in jail and $1,000. As written, an individual in a spontaneous protest that blocks a sidewalk, “recklessly creating a risk” of inconveniencing people, would be guilty of the offense. The bill would also add the offense to the underlying offenses that can be charged as a hate crime under New York law, and allow individuals arrested for the offense to be held for bail.

(See full text of bill here)

Status: pending

Introduced 26 Feb 2024.

Issue(s): Traffic Interference

return to map
New York

A 8951: "Domestic terrorism" offense for protesters who block traffic

Would create a new felony “domestic terrorism” offense that could apply to nonviolent protesters who block roads or sidewalks. Under the bill, a person commits “domestic terrorism” if they “act with the intent to cause the deliberate blocking” of a public road, bridge, or tunnel that interferes with traffic or public safety. Notably, the bill does not require that the person actually block a road, only that they act with that intent, so that even planning or otherwise facilitating a street protest that would interfere with traffic could be covered by the offense. Further, for the purpose of the bill, “public road” is defined broadly to include “every class of public road, square and place,” including driveways, alleys, and sidewalks. If enacted, individuals who attend or organize a sidewalk protest that interferes with pedestrian traffic could face felony charges and up to 7 years in prison.

(See full text of bill here)

Status: pending

Introduced 30 Jan 2024.

Issue(s): Terrorism, Traffic Interference

return to map
Tennessee

HB 2031 / SB 2570: Heightened penalties for protesters who block streets and highways

Would significantly increase the penalty for knowingly or recklessly obstructing a street, highway, “or other place used for the passage of vehicles or conveyances.” Instead of a Class A misdemeanor, as provided by current law, the offense would be a Class D felony punishable by at least 2 and up to 12 years in prison and a $5,000 fine. As written, the bill’s felony offense could cover protesters who blocked a street or made passage "unreasonably inconvenient" even if there were no cars on it. The felony offense could also apply to protesters who blocked a driveway or alley, even temporarily. The bill would also create a new civil cause of action such that anyone who knowingly or recklessly blocked a street could additionally be sued for civil damages.

(See full text of bill here)

Status: pending

Introduced 23 Jan 2024.

Issue(s): Damage Costs, Traffic Interference

return to map
Washington

SB 6160: Heightened penalties for protests that block traffic

Would create a new felony offense that could cover street protesters who obstruct traffic and refuse to disperse. Under current state law, if a group of four or more individuals includes anyone whose conduct creates a substantial risk of injury or substantial property damage, each member of the group commits a misdemeanor if law enforcement orders them to disperse and they refuse to do so. The bill would raise this offense to a Class C felony, punishable by up to 5 years in prison and $10,000, if individuals refuse to disperse from a public road and are obstructing traffic. The bill would also increase the penalty for intentionally and unlawfully blocking vehicular or pedestrian traffic, from a misdemeanor to a gross misdemeanor, such that protesters who block a sidewalk could face up to 1 year in jail and $5,000.

(See full text of bill here)

Status: pending

Introduced 11 Jan 2024.

Issue(s): Traffic Interference

return to map
West Virginia

HB 5446: New penalties for protesters who block streets and sidewalks

Would create new penalties for protesters who block streets, sidewalks, and other public passageways. Under the bill, someone who obstructs a highway, street, sidewalk or “other place used for the passage of persons, vehicles, or conveyances,” whether alone or with others, commits a misdemeanor, punishable by up to one year in jail. A second or subsequent offense would be a felony, punishable by up to 3 years in prison. The bill defines “obstruct” to include conduct that makes passage “unreasonably inconvenient.” As such, protesters on a sidewalk who were deemed to have made it “unreasonably inconvenient” for pedestrians to pass could face jail terms.   

(See full text of bill here)

Status: pending

Introduced 5 Feb 2024.

Issue(s): Traffic Interference

return to map
West Virginia

HB 4994: Potential "terrorism" charges for nonviolent protesters

Would create several new, sweeping “terrorism” offenses that could cover nonviolent protesters. One new offense, “terrorist violent mass action,” is defined to include “violent protests” and “riots” that “appear intended” to coerce or intimidate groups, governments, or societies. The bill provides that participation in a “terrorist violent mass action” constitutes an “terrorist act,” and any entity that uses such actions “to advance its agenda” is a “terrorist group.” “Violent protest” is not defined in the bill or elsewhere in the law, nor does the bill require that a person individually commit any act of violence or property damage to be culpable of “terrorist violent mass action.” As such, someone who peacefully participates in a nonviolent but rowdy protest where a few individuals commit property damage could conceivably face “terrorism” charges. Likewise, a nonprofit group involved in organizing or supporting such a protest “to advance its agenda” could be deemed a “terrorist organization” under the bill. Individuals and organizations not directly involved in such a protest could also face felony “terrorism” charges for providing protesters with “material support”—broadly defined by the bill as “any property, tangible or intangible, or service.” The bill also creates a new felony “terrorism” offense for “actions… taken for political reasons to bar other persons from exercising their freedom of movement, via foot or any other conveyance.” As defined, that could cover a large, peaceful march that even temporarily stops traffic. Meanwhile, the bill provides complete immunity for people who “injure perpetrators or supporters of perpetrators” while attempting to “escape” such “terrorism.” This provision would seem to eliminate consequences for acts of violence against protesters by people whose movement has been blocked by a protest, including drivers who hit protesters with their cars. The bill also creates new felony “threatening terrorism” offenses for a person or group that "for political reasons blockades property containing critical infrastructure,” or that “trespasses for political reasons onto property containing critical infrastructure.” As such, nonviolent protesters who block a road to a pipeline or enter onto pipeline property could face “threatening terrorism” charges, punishable by up to 10 years in prison. The bill is largely similar to HB 2916, proposed in the 2023 session.

(See full text of bill here)

Status: pending

Introduced 22 Jan 2024.

Issue(s): Conspiracy, Driver Immunity, Infrastructure, Riot, Terrorism, Traffic Interference, Trespass

return to map

For more information about the Tracker, contact Elly Page at EPage@icnl.org.