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
268 bills
40 enacted 16 pending

No initiatives
Pending, defeated or expired initiatives
Enacted initiatives

Legislation

Latest updates: May. 1, 2023 (Texas), Mar. 31, 2023 (North Carolina, Utah), Mar. 24, 2023 (Wisconsin)
Filter by:
Locations
Status
Issues
Date

Locations

Status

Issues

Introduction Date

from

to

Type

or
X

13 entries matching in provided filters in 10 states. Clear all filters
Arizona

SB 1023: Vague ban on residential protests

Would amend Arizona’s law on residential picketing to criminalize demonstrations at an individual’s home that “a reasonable person” would find “harassing, annoying, or alarming”--regardless of demonstrators’ intent. Current law bans only demonstrations where the people demonstrating at someone’s home specifically intend “to harass, annoy, or alarm” another person. The vagueness of the “reasonable person” standard in the bill would make it difficult for protesters to know in advance what conduct was prohibited at protests in residential areas, and could also allow authorities to target disfavored protests. (See full text of bill here)

Status: pending

Introduced 10 Jan 2023; Approved by Senate 21 February 2023

return to map
Arizona

HB 2059: Enhanced penalties for blocking traffic and other conduct during "riot" or "unlawful assembly," and new "aggravated riot" and "mob intimidation" offenses

Creates a new Class 6 felony for interfering with the passage of traffic while engaged in a “riot,” “aggravated riot,” or “unlawful assembly.” Arizona law defines "riot" and "unlawful assembly" broadly; "unlawful assembly" for instance includes merely being present at a gathering that includes two people who intend to engage in a "riot," and refusing to disperse. HB 2059 also broadens an existing Class 2 misdemeanor offense related to blocking traffic, to criminalize anyone who recklessly interferes with the “free, convenience and normal use” of any public thoroughfare. The bill creates a serious new felony, “aggravated riot,” that includes participation in a “riot” involving 25 people. The new offense would be a Class 3 felony, punishable by at least 2 and up to 25 years in prison. The bill would also increase the penalties for any unlawful conduct committed "in furtherance of a riot or an unlawful assembly." Under the bill's proposed penalty escalations, someone who commits a serious misdemeanor in a way deemed to be "furthering" an "unlawful assembly" could face felony penalties. The bill also creates a new offense of "mob intimidation," defined as gathering with two or more people and using or threatening to use force "to compel or induce, or attempt to compel or induce, another person to do or refrain from doing any act or to assume, abandon, or maintain a particular viewpoint against the person's will." The new offense would be a Class 1 misdemeanor, punishable by up to one year in jail. Finally, the bill provides that cities and towns have a duty to allow law enforcement to "respond appropriately" to protect property and people during riots and unlawful assemblies, and enables individuals to sue "for any damages" governing officials who breach that duty. If enacted, such provisions could deter local officials who might otherwise seek to limit aggressive law enforcement responses to protests. (See full text of bill here)

Status: pending

Introduced 9 Jan 2023.

Issue(s): Police Response, Riot, Traffic Interference, State Liability

return to map
Georgia

HB 505: Heightened penalties for "riot"

Would increase the penalty for “riot” from a misdemeanor to a felony punishable by up to 20 years in prison. Georgia law defines “riot” to include just two people who do anything “in a violent and tumultuous manner,” as well as those who carry out an unlawful act of violence. As such, the law can be used to prosecute demonstrators who did not personally engage in any violence. The law also does not require that a person act with intent. Under the bill, a demonstrator who unintentionally acts in a way that authorities deem “violent and tumultuous” could face felony arrest and up to 20 years in prison. (See full text of bill here)

Status: pending

Introduced 21 Feb 2023; Approved by House 1 March 2023

Issue(s): Riot

return to map
Illinois

SB 1312 / HB 2362: NEW PENALTIES FOR PROTESTS NEAR CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE

Would heighten the penalties for protests near oil and gas pipelines and other infrastructure that involve trespassing onto infrastructure property. Under the bill, knowingly entering or remaining on a "critical infrastructure facility" is a Class 4 felony, punishable by 1-3 years in prison and $25,000. Aggravated criminal trespass to a critical infrastructure facility--defined as trespass with "intent to damage, destroy, or tamper with equipment" in the facility--is a Class 3 felony punishable by 5-10 years and $25,000. The bill newly defines "critical infrastructure facility" under Illinois law to include gas and oil pipelines, including those under construction, and a range of pipeline-related facilities, as well as electric, water, telecommunications, and railroad facilities that are fenced off or posted. Nearly identical text was introduced as SB 3814 in the 2022 legislative session. (See full text of bill here)

Status: pending

Introduced 6 Feb 2023.

Issue(s): Infrastructure, Trespass

return to map
Massachusetts

HD 1358: NEW PENALTIES FOR PROTESTS THAT BLOCK ROADS

Would penalize "any person who intentionally blocks or prevents access to a public roadway or highway while protesting with the express purpose of preventing passage of others." Under the bill, anyone who intentionally blocked a public road in the course of a protest could be sentenced to up to ten years in prison. This bill is nearly identical to HB 1586, introduced in 2021, and HB 1428, introduced in 2019. (See full text of bill here)

Status: pending

Introduced 18 Jan 2023.

Issue(s): Traffic Interference

return to map
Massachusetts

HD 1348: NEW CRIMINAL LIABILITY FOR DEATHS DURING PROTESTS

Would create the new criminal offense of "manslaughter caused by reckless disregard of life while protesting or blocking highway or roadway access." The offense would be added to the definition of "manslaughter" under Massachusetts law. Accordingly, if organizers led a protest onto a road and a protester was hit by a car, e.g., the organizers could potentially be held liable for manslaughter under the bill. The offense would be punishable by up to twenty years in prison. The bill is nearly identical to HD 3284, introduced in 2019. (See full text of bill here)

Status: pending

Introduced 18 Jan 2023.

Issue(s): Traffic Interference

return to map
Minnesota

HF 1445 / SF 1493: New penalties for protests near oil and gas pipelines

Would create vicarious liability for any person or entity that "recruits, trains, aids, advises, hires, counsels, or conspires with" a person who trespasses on critical infrastructure property for any damages committed by the trespasser. The bill would also create strict liability for any damages caused by a person who trespasses on critical infrastructure property. If a person or entity intentionally recruits, trains, aids, advises, hires, counsels, or conspires with a person to trespass they are guilty of a gross misdemeanor, punishable by a fine of up to $3,000, if they fail to make a reasonable effort to prevent the violation. (See full text of bill here)

Status: pending

Introduced 9 Feb 2023.

Issue(s): Damage Costs, Conspiracy, Infrastructure, Trespass

return to map
Minnesota

SF 935: BARRING PUBLIC BENEFITS FOR PROTEST-RELATED OFFENSES

Would broadly disqualify a person convicted of an offense during a protest from receiving public assistance. Any "offense related to the person's illegal conduct at a protest, demonstration, rally, civil unrest, or march" would disqualify the person from a range of benefits, including food assistance, education loans and grants, and unemployment assistance. Under the bill, a person convicted of even a misdemeanor that is deemed somehow "related" to their participation in a peaceful protest could face permanent disqualification from such benefits. Nearly identical text was introduced as HF 466/SF 2381 in 2021. (See full text of bill here)

Status: pending

Introduced 30 Jan 2023.

Issue(s): Limit on Public Benefits

return to map
New York

A 2309: Mandatory Sanctions for Campus Protesters

Would create new mandatory penalties that could be applied against nonviolent protesters at all state and city colleges and universities in New York. Under the bill, a student that "materially and substantially disrupts the free expression of others" would face a minimum one week suspension for the first offense; a minimum two week suspension for a second offense; a minimum one semester suspension for a third offense; and expulsion for a fourth offense. As such, a student protester that was deemed to interrupt a speaker at an event would be required to be suspended. (See full text of bill here)

Status: pending

Introduced 25 Jan 2023.

Issue(s): Campus Speech

return to map
North Carolina

SB 58: New penalties for protests near pipelines

Would introduce new potential criminal and civil penalties for peaceful protests near existing and planned pipelines and other energy infrastructure. The fourth, amended version of the bill would create a new Class C felony offense to knowingly and willfully “obstruct, impede, or impair” or “attempt to obstruct, impede, or impair” the services of an energy facility. (The original bill did not include this language.) The bill defines “energy facility” to include any facility involved in the transmission of “electricity, fuel, or another form of energy source,” including facilities that are under construction or otherwise not functioning. As such, a group of people protesting the construction of a fossil fuel pipeline could face more than 15 years in prison and a mandatory $250,000 fine if they impede or impair the construction of a pipeline, for instance by blocking workers’ access to the pipeline construction site. Under the bill, such protesters, along with anyone who “aides or abets, solicits, conspires, or lends material support” to their act of impeding construction could also face significant civil penalties from the fossil fuel company. (See full text of bill here)

Status: pending

Introduced 1 Feb 2023; Approved by Senate 14 March 2023

Issue(s): Damage Costs, Conspiracy, Infrastructure

return to map
Oregon

HB 2772: Criminalizing Certain Protests as Domestic Terrorism

Would create a new crime of domestic terrorism that would include if a person intentionally attempts to cause "disruption of daily life" that "severely affects the population, infrastructure, environment, or government functioning of this state." Under this definition a protest that blocks traffic in a major commercial district could be defined as domestic terrorism. The penalty is a class B felony punishable by up to 10 years in jail and/or a fine of up to $250,000. (See full text of bill here)

Status: pending

Introduced 9 Jan 2023.

Issue(s): Infrastructure, Terrorism, Traffic Interference

return to map
Texas

SB 2593: New defense for police who injure protesters

Would create a new defense for police who recklessly injure or kill protesters with so-called “less lethal” projectile weapons. Under the bill, police could avoid prosecution for a range of charges—including assault; aggravated assault; injury to a child, elderly individual, or disabled individual; and deadly conduct—for their use of projectile weapons like rubber bullets. The defense would apply as long as the officer was acting in the course of their official duties and did not intend to cause serious injury or death. As such, the bill would make it extremely difficult to convict an on-duty officer who recklessly blinds a child protester or kills an elderly demonstrator with a projectile weapon. Similar defenses in Texas’s Penal Code, by contrast, require that the person who used force must have had a reasonable belief that such force was necessary. By not including such a requirement, the bill could encourage police officers’ reckless use of “less lethal” projectile weapons against protesters and others. The bill is written to apply retroactively, and critics have pointed out that at the time of its introduction, 22 indicted police officers were awaiting trial in Texas based on their reckless use of “less lethal” projectile weapons during racial justice protests in 2020. (See full text of bill here)

Status: pending

Introduced 3 Apr 2023; Approved by Senate April 26, 2023

Issue(s): Police Response

return to map
Wisconsin

AB 70 / SB 96: BROAD NEW DEFINITION OF "RIOT" and related felony offenses

Would broadly define "riot" under Wisconsin law and create vague new felony offenses that could cover and chill peaceful protest activity. The bill defines a “riot” as a “public disturbance” involving an act of violence or the threat of violence by someone in a gathering of 3 or more people. No actual damage or injury need take place for a gathering to become a “riot,” only a “clear and present danger” of damage or injury. As such, a large street protest where a single participant threatens to push somebody could be deemed a "riot," with no actual violence or property damage being committed by anyone. The bill creates a Class I felony offense--punishable by up to 3.5 years in prison and a $10,000 fine--for anyone who intentionally incites another “to commit a ‘riot.’” The bill defines “incite” as “to urge, promote, organize, encourage, or instigate other persons.” The incitement offense as drafted is not limited to urging actual violence against people or property, but could seemingly cover any expression of support for demonstrators in a crowd that had been deemed a “riot.” The bill also creates a Class H felony--punishable by up to 6 years in prison and $10,000--for someone who intentionally "commits an act of violence” while part of a “riot.” Yet “an act of violence” is vague and could cover an act of self-defense, non-criminal acts of violence against property--such as destroying one’s own protest sign--as well as minor unlawful violence against property like knocking over a trash can. (See full text of bill here)

Status: pending

Introduced 27 Feb 2023; Approved by Assembly 22 March 2023

Issue(s): Riot

return to map

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