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.
Latest updates: Apr. 29, 2025 (Pennsylvania, Tennessee), Apr. 28, 2025 (North Carolina, North Dakota, West Virginia), Apr. 10, 2025 (US Federal)
29 entries matching in provided filters in 0 states and 1 federal. Clear all filters
US Federal
HR 2272: Blocking financial aid to students who commit a "riot"-related offense
Would bar federal financial assistance and loan forgiveness for any student convicted of a crime in connection with a “riot.” The bar would apply to students convicted of “rioting” or “a) inciting a riot; b) organizing, promoting, encouraging, participating in, or carrying on a riot; c) committing any act of violence in furtherance of a riot; or d) aiding or abetting any person in inciting or participating in or carrying on a riot or committing any act of violence in furtherance of a riot.” Many states define “riot” broadly enough to cover peaceful protest activity; many also have broad laws criminalizing “incitement to riot” that cover protected expression. The bill would bar financial aid and loan forgiveness for students convicted under such provisions. As written, the bill would also bar financial aid and loan forgiveness to students convicted of any offense related to “organizing, promoting, encouraging” a riot, or “aiding and abetting” incitement or participation in a riot, which could cover an even wider range of expressive conduct, from sharing a social media post to cheering on demonstrators in a protest that was deemed a “riot.”
(
See full text of bill here)
Status: pending
Introduced 21 Mar 2025.
Issue(s): Campus Protests, Riot, Limit on Public Benefits
return to map
US Federal
HR 2273: Providing for visa revocation and deportation of noncitizens who commit a "riot"-related offense
Would require the Secretary of State to revoke the visa of and make deportable a noncitizen student, scholar, teacher, or specialist convicted of a crime in connection with a “riot.” Under the bill, individuals in the US on an F-1, J-1, or M-1 visa would have their visas revoked and would be deportable if they were convicted of “rioting” or “a) inciting a riot; b) organizing, promoting, encouraging, participating in, or carrying on a riot; c) committing any act of violence in furtherance of a riot; or d) aiding or abetting any person in inciting or participating in or carrying on a riot or committing any act of violence in furtherance of a riot.” Many states define “riot” broadly enough to cover peaceful protest activity; many also have broad laws criminalizing “incitement to riot” that cover protected expression. The bill would provide for the deportation of foreign students, scholars, and others convicted under such provisions. As written, the bill would also provide for their deportation if convicted of any offense related to “organizing, promoting, encouraging” a riot, or “aiding and abetting” incitement or participation in a riot, which could cover an even wider range of expressive conduct, from sharing a social media post to cheering on demonstrators in a protest that was deemed a “riot.”
(
See full text of bill here)
Status: pending
Introduced 21 Mar 2025.
Issue(s): Campus Protests, Riot
return to map
US Federal
S 1017: New federal criminal penalties for protests near pipelines
Would create a new federal felony offense that could apply to protests of planned or operational pipelines. The bill would broadly criminalize under federal law “knowingly and willfully” “vandalizing, tampering with, disrupting the operation or construction of, or preventing the operation or construction of” a gas pipeline. A range of peaceful activities could be deemed “disrupting… the construction of” a pipeline, from a rally that obstructs a road used by construction equipment, to a lawsuit challenging a pipeline’s permit or zoning approval. The bill does not define “disrupt,” such that even a brief delay would seemingly be covered. Further, the underlying law provides that any "attempt" or "conspiracy" to commit the offense would be punished the same as actual commission. As such, individuals as well as organizations that engage in the planning or facilitation of a protest that is deemed to “disrupt” pipeline construction could be covered. The offense would be punishable by up to 20 years in prison and a fine of up to $250,000 for an individual, or $500,000 for an organization.
(
See full text of bill here)
Status: pending
Introduced 13 Mar 2025.
Issue(s): Protest Supporters or Funders, Infrastructure
return to map
US Federal
S 982: Potential penalties for universities based on protest policies
Would make federal accreditation of colleges and universities—and thus their access to federal funds—contingent on the institution’s policies on responding to protests. Under the “No Tax Dollars for College Encampments Act of 2024,” universities would have to regularly disclose how they respond to campus “incidents of civil disturbance,” defined to include “a demonstration, riot, or strike,” and their accreditation would be linked to such policies and practices. The bill sponsor cited pro-Palestine campus protests as motivation for the bill; he introduced the same bill in 2024.
(
See full text of bill here)
Status: pending
Introduced 12 Mar 2025.
Issue(s): Campus Protests, Riot
return to map
US Federal
HR 2065: Harsh penalties for protesters who conceal their identity
Would make it a federal crime, subject to a lengthy prison sentence, to wear a mask or other disguise while protesting in an "intimidating" or “oppressive” way. Under the “Unmasking Hamas Act,” anyone "in disguise, including while wearing a mask" who "injures, oppresses, threatens, or intimidates any person" exercising their constitutional rights could be sentenced to up to 15 years in prison as well as fined. The bill does not define “oppress,” nor does the bill specify what is meant by “disguise,” other than that it includes a “mask.” The bill’s substantive provisions are identical to the “Unmasking Antifa Act,” which lawmakers have introduced in several previous sessions. Sponsors of the bill made clear that it is a response to pro-Palestine protesters, some of whom have worn masks to avoid retaliation.
(
See full text of bill here)
Status: pending
Introduced 11 Mar 2025.
Issue(s): Face Covering
return to map
US Federal
S 937: Barring student protesters from federal loans and loan forgiveness
Would exclude student protesters from federal financial aid and loan forgiveness if they commit any crime at a campus protest. The bill would cover someone convicted of “any offense” under “any Federal or State law” that is “related to the individual’s conduct at and during the course of a protest” at a college or university. As such, a student convicted of even a nonviolent, state law misdemeanor at a campus protest, such as failing to disperse, would be deemed ineligible for federal student loans; they would also be ineligible for having existing federal loans forgiven, cancelled, waived or modified. The sponsor of the bill said it was a response to pro-Palestine protests at colleges and universities.
(
See full text of bill here)
Status: pending
Introduced 11 Mar 2025.
Issue(s): Campus Protests, Limit on Public Benefits
return to map
US Federal
HR 1057: Penalties for protesters on interstate highways
Would create steep new penalties for protesters deemed to be “deliberately delaying traffic,” “standing or approaching a motor vehicle,” or “endangering the safe movement of a motor vehicle” on an interstate highway “with the intent to obstruct the free, convenient, and normal use of the interstate highway.” The new federal offense would be punishable by up to $10,000 and 15 years in prison—a far harsher penalty than is the case under many states' laws, which generally already criminalize walking or standing on the highway. The bill provides an exception for “any lawful activity” authorized by federal, state, or local law. However, it could still seemingly cover far more than “blocking” the interstate, including a peaceful protest on the shoulder of an interstate or a convoy-style, driving protest that slowed traffic. The sponsor of the bill made clear that it was in response to protesters. The same bill was introduced as HR 7349 in 2024.
(
See full text of bill here)
Status: pending
Introduced 6 Feb 2025.
Issue(s): Traffic Interference
return to map
US Federal
S 4756 / HR 9117: Revoking visas and deporting foreign protesters
Would immediately cancel the visa of any alien convicted of a crime related to “conduct at and during the course of a protest that occurs at an institution of higher education” or at a facility operated by a religious institution; involving the defacement, vandalism, or destruction of a federal memorial or monument; or involving the intentional obstruction of any highway, road, bridge, or tunnel. The bill provides that any alien who is convicted of such a crime shall be removed from the U.S. within 60 days of their conviction.
(
See full text of bill here)
Status: defeated / expired
Introduced 24 Jul 2024.
Issue(s): Campus Protests, Traffic Interference
return to map
US Federal
HR 9102: Barring Student Protesters from Federal Student Loans
Would ban “a student who is convicted of a hate crime under State of Federal law for conduct that occurred during a protest at an institution of higher education that disrupts the normal campus functions” from receiving a federal student loan or participating in a federal student loan forgiveness program. The bill defines "hate crime" to include a federal hate crime under Section 18 U.SC. 249, but does not define other federal or state hate crimes that would also be covered. As such, if a state enacted a hate crime law that included nonviolent conduct, a conviction under that state law could trigger the ban on federal student loan assistance under the bill.
(
See full text of bill here)
Status: defeated / expired
Introduced 23 Jul 2024.
Issue(s): Campus Protests, Limit on Public Benefits
return to map
US Federal
HR 8883: Potential penalties for universities based on protest policies
Would make federal accreditation of colleges and universities—and thus their access to federal funds—contingent on the institution’s policies on responding to protests. Under the “No Tax Dollars for College Encampments Act of 2024,” universities would have to regularly disclose how they respond to campus “incidents of civil disturbance,” defined to include “a demonstration, riot, or strike,” and their accreditation would be linked to such policies and practices. The bill sponsor cited pro-Palestine encampments on university campuses and other campus demonstrations as motivation for the bill.
(
See full text of bill here)
Status: defeated / expired
Introduced 28 Jun 2024.
Issue(s): Campus Protests, Riot, Limit on Public Benefits
return to map
US Federal
HR 8823: Withholding federal funds from states that do not punish street protesters
Would enable the federal government to withhold highway funding from states that allow protests on highways and other public roads. The bill would direct the Secretary of Transportation to withhold 10 percent of a state’s allocated federal highway funds each year, unless the Secretary could certify that the state had made “reasonable efforts” to prohibit individuals from “knowingly and recklessly obstructing” transportation on Federal-aid highways, which make up roughly one-quarter of all public roads in the U.S. Under the bill, the Secretary would have sole and unbounded discretion to make such a certification. The bill sponsor indicated that the bill is “a direct response to the increasing trend of unlawful traffic-obstructing protests.”
(
See full text of bill here)
Status: defeated / expired
Introduced 25 Jun 2024.
Issue(s): Traffic Interference, Limit on Public Benefits
return to map
US Federal
HR 8468: BARRING STUDENT LOAN FORGIVENESS FOR CAMPUS PROTESTERS
Would disqualify certain campus protesters from federal student loan forgiveness programs. Under the bill, a student or faculty member who is expelled or fired from a higher education institution for a protest-related reason is not eligible for any loan forgiveness program under federal law. Covered reasons for expulsion or firing comprise “creating a public disturbance,” “disorderly conduct,” “trespassing,” “hate crime,” and violating provisions of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 related to discrimination. The bill’s sponsor cited pro-Palestine demonstrations on college campuses as motivation for the legislation.
(
See full text of bill here)
Status: defeated / expired
Introduced 21 May 2024.
Issue(s): Campus Protests, Trespass, Limit on Public Benefits
return to map
US Federal
S 4295: Barring federal funds for universities that don’t clear protest camps
Would bar federal funding for colleges and universities that fail to remove prolonged protest encampments. Under the “Encampments or Endowments Act,” if the Secretary of Education determined that a university permitted a protest encampment on campus for more than seven days, and camp participants had “attempted to interfere with a core function of the institution of higher education” or “obstructed the ingress or egress of students,” then the university would be ineligible to receive federal financial assistance for five years. The barred assistance would include institutional as well as student aid such as Pell grants and federal loans. Disqualified schools would have to provide grant-based aid to students to make up for the federal aid they would have otherwise received, and if they failed to do so, they would have to pay a tax equal to 50 percent of their endowment’s assets. The sponsor cited pro-Palestine protests on college campuses as the motivation for the bill.
(
See full text of bill here)
Status: defeated / expired
Introduced 9 May 2024.
Issue(s): Campus Protests, Camping, Limit on Public Benefits
return to map
US Federal
S 4302: Barring federal financial aid for students convicted of protest-related offenses
Would prohibit federal financial aid for students who are convicted of protest-related offenses while participating in a campus protest. The prohibition on federal financial aid under the “No Higher education Assistance for Mobs of Antisemitic and terrorist Sympathizing Students (No HAMAS) Act" would apply to students who are convicted under federal or state law of trespassing, unlawful assembly, rioting, or damaging property while protesting at a college or university. Such students would be ineligible for any federal grant, loan, or work study assistance. The sponsor and cosponsors of the bill have pointed to pro-Palestine protests on college and university campuses as their motivation, however the legislation could cover students who are convicted of nonviolent offenses such as trespass while demonstrating for any cause while on campus.
(
See full text of bill here)
Status: defeated / expired
Introduced 9 May 2024.
Issue(s): Campus Protests, Riot, Trespass, Limit on Public Benefits
return to map
US Federal
HR 8322: Revoking visas of foreign student protesters
Would revoke the F, J, or M student visas of students who are “arrested for rioting or unlawful protest,” or “arrested while establishing, participating in, or promoting an encampment” at an institute of higher education. The bill’s sponsor cited foreign students who have participated in pro-Palestine protests on college campuses.
(
See full text of bill here)
Status: defeated / expired
Introduced 8 May 2024.
Issue(s): Campus Protests, Riot, Camping
return to map
US Federal
HR 8321: Mandatory community service in Gaza for campus protesters
Would require anyone convicted of “unlawful activity” on a college or university campus “after October 7, 2023,” to be “assigned” to the Gaza Strip “for the purpose of providing community service” for a minimum of six months. While the bill would apply to individuals convicted of “unlawful activity”, the sponsor indicated that the bill is targeting individuals involved in pro-Palestine demonstrations and encampments on college campuses.
(
See full text of bill here)
Status: defeated / expired
Introduced 8 May 2024.
Issue(s): Campus Protests
return to map
US Federal
HR 8248: Harsh penalties for protesters who conceal their identity
Would reintroduce the “Unmasking Antifa Act”--first introduced in 2018--which would make it a federal crime, subject to a lengthy prison sentence, to wear a mask or other disguise while protesting in a "threatening" or "intimidating" way. Under the act, anyone "in disguise, including while wearing a mask" who "injures, oppresses, threatens, or intimidates any person" excercising their constitutional rights could be sentenced to up to 15 years in prison as well as fined. The bill explicitly exempts police and other law enforcement agents, stating that "nothing in this section shall be construed so as to deter any law enforcement officer from lawfully carrying out the duties of his office." While the bill title refers to unmasking "Antifa," the sponsor of the reintroduced bill has focused on pro-Palestine protesters, some of whom have worn masks to protect themselves from doxxing and other forms of retaliation.
(
See full text of bill here)
Status: defeated / expired
Introduced 6 May 2024.
Issue(s): Face Covering
return to map
US Federal
S 4240 / HR 8242: Barring student loan forgiveness for campus protesters
Would bar federal student loan forgiveness for individuals convicted of protest-related offenses on a college or university campus. The “No Bailouts for Campus Criminals Act” would exclude an individual from the federal government’s forgiveness, cancellation, or modification of a student loan if they are convicted of “any offense” under federal or state law “related to” the individual’s conduct at a protest occurring at an institution of higher education. As such, if adopted, individuals convicted of even minor, nonviolent state law offenses such as trespass or unlawful assembly would be ineligible for loan forgiveness. Congressional sponsors of the bill cited pro-Palestine protests on college campuses as impetus for the legislation.
(
See full text of bill here)
Status: defeated / expired
Introduced 2 May 2024.
Issue(s): Campus Protests, Limit on Public Benefits
return to map
US Federal
HR 8221: Deportation of foreigners charged with crimes related to protests
Would provide for the deportation of a foreign individual “charged” with “any crime” related to their participation in “pro-terrorism or antisemitism rallies or demonstrations.” Under the bill, a foreign individual merely charged—not necessarily convicted—with an offense as minor as a misdemeanor could face deportation if the offense was “related” to their participation in a protest deemed “pro-terrorism or antisemiti[c]" in nature. The sponsor of the bill, titled “Hamas Supporters Have No Home Here Act,” cited the involvement of foreign students in campus protests against Israel’s military campaign in Gaza.
(
See full text of bill here)
Status: defeated / expired
Introduced 1 May 2024.
Issue(s): Campus Protests
return to map
US Federal
S 3887: Heightened penalties for riot offenses
Would significantly increase the penalties for federal “riot” and “incitement to riot” offenses if they involve property damage or injury. The bill would create a new, mandatory one-year prison sentence for anyone who commits “an act of violence” or aids someone else in doing so, while participating in, organizing, “inciting,” “promoting,” or “encouraging” a “riot.” The maximum penalty would jump to 10, instead of 5, years in prison. Federal law defines “act of violence” broadly to include using force against property—or just attempting or threatening to use such force. Under the bill, someone who knocked over a trash can, or merely threatened to do so, while cheering on an unruly protest, could face 10 years in prison.
(
See full text of bill here)
Status: defeated / expired
Introduced 6 Mar 2024.
Issue(s): Riot
return to map
US Federal
S 3492 / HR 6926: Federal penalties for protesters who block traffic
Would create federal penalties for protesters who block public roads and highways. The “Safe and Open Streets Act” would make it a federal crime to “in any way or degree, purposely obstruct, delay, or affect commerce or the movement of any article or commodity in commerce by blocking a public road or highway.” The offense would also cover individuals who merely “attempt” or “conspire” to block a public road or highway. The offense would be punishable by an unspecified fine and up to 5 years in federal prison.
(
See full text of bill here)
Status: defeated / expired
Introduced 13 Dec 2023.
Issue(s): Protest Supporters or Funders, Traffic Interference
return to map
US Federal
S 192 / HR 7349: Penalties for protesters on interstate highways
Would create steep new penalties for protesters deemed to be “deliberately delaying traffic,” “standing or approaching a motor vehicle,” or “endangering the safe movement of a motor vehicle” on an interstate highway “with the intent to obstruct the free, convenient, and normal use of the interstate highway.” The new federal offense would be punishable by up to $10,000 and 15 years in prison—a far harsher penalty than is the case under many states' laws, which generally already criminalize walking or standing on the highway. The bill provides an exception for “any lawful activity” authorized by federal, state, or local law. However, it could still seemingly cover far more than “blocking” the interstate, including a peaceful protest on the shoulder of an interstate or a convoy-style, driving protest that slowed traffic. The same bill was introduced as S 4825 in 2022.
(
See full text of bill here)
Status: defeated / expired
Introduced 31 Jan 2023.
Issue(s): Traffic Interference
return to map
US Federal
S 4825: Penalties for protesters on interstate highways
Would prohibit “deliberately delaying traffic,” “standing or approaching a motor vehicle,” or “endangering the safe movement of a motor vehicle” on an interstate highway “with the intent to obstruct the free, convenient, and normal use of the interstate highway.” The new federal offense would be punishable by up to $10,000 and 15 years in prison—a far harsher penalty than is the case under many states' laws, which generally already criminalize walking or standing on the highway. The bill provides an exception for “any lawful activity” authorized by federal, state, or local law. However it could still seemingly cover far more than “blocking” the interstate, including a peaceful protest on the shoulder of an interstate or a convoy-style, driving protest that slowed down traffic.
(
See full text of bill here)
Status: defeated / expired
Introduced 13 Sep 2022.
Issue(s): Traffic Interference
return to map
US Federal
HR 6653: Barring small business aid to individuals convicted of "riot" offenses
Would bar individuals convicted of “riot” offenses from receiving small business assistance from the federal government. The bill provides that a person convicted of a felony for actions during or “in connection with” a riot is prohibited from participating in any program run by the Small Business Administration, if the riot resulted in the destruction of a small business. The definition of “riot” under federal law is broad, requiring only a “public disturbance” where one individual in a group commits violence. An individual can be convicted of participating or inciting a “riot” based on conduct that was neither violent nor destructive. Under the bill, individuals convicted of such offenses would become ineligible for support such as disaster relief loans, loans to avert hardship caused by COVID-19, and other small business assistance.
(
See full text of bill here)
Status: defeated / expired
Introduced 9 Feb 2022.
Issue(s): Riot, Limit on Public Benefits
return to map
US Federal
HR 289: Stripping Pandemic Aid from Individuals Convicted of "Protest-Related" Federal Crimes
Would withdraw COVID-19 unemployment benefits from and impose new costs on anyone convicted of a federal offense related to the individual's conduct at and during a protest. Such a person would be ineligible for federal unemployment aid under the CARES Act (15 U.S.C. 9023) or any other Federal supplemental unemployment compensation during the COVID-19 public health emergency. If federal agents were involved in policing the protest at issue, the person who was convicted of a related federal offense would also have to pay the cost of the agents' policing activity, as determined by the court. Federal offenses include both violations of federal law, and violations of state law that occur on federal property. As such, the bill's withdrawal of benefits and imposition of new costs could apply to, e.g., a peaceful protester convicted of misdemeanor trespass for refusing to leave a demonstration on the steps of a federal courthouse or a sit-in at a congressional office. This bill is nearly identical to HB 8117 introduced in 2020. (See full text of bill here)
Status: defeated / expired
Introduced 13 Jan 2021.
Issue(s): Security Costs, Limit on Public Benefits
return to map
US Federal
HR 8117: Stripping Pandemic Aid from Individuals Convicted of "Protest-Related" Federal Crimes
Would withdraw COVID-19 unemployment benefits from and impose new costs on anyone convicted of a federal offense related to the individual's conduct at and during a protest. Such a person would be ineligible for federal unemployment aid under the CARES Act (15 U.S.C. 9023) or any other Federal supplemental unemployment compensation during the COVID-19 public health emergency. If federal agents were involved in policing the protest at issue, the person who was convicted of a related federal offense would also have to pay the cost of the agents' policing activity, as determined by the court. Federal offenses include both violations of federal law, and violations of state law that occur on federal property. As such, the bill's withdrawal of benefits and imposition of new costs could apply to, e.g., a peaceful protester convicted of misdemeanor trespass for refusing to leave a demonstration on the steps of a federal courthouse or a sit-in at a congressional office. (See full text of bill here)
Status: defeated / expired
Introduced 28 Aug 2020.
Issue(s): Security Costs, Limit on Public Benefits
return to map
US Federal
S 4424: Withhold Federal Funding for Failure to Prosecute Destructive Protest Activities
Would empower the U.S. Attorney General to withhold up to 10% of select federal funding from a state prosecutor's office, district attorney's office, or state attorney general office, if the U.S. Attorney General determines that the office has "abused the use of prosecutorial discretion by failing to prosecute crimes stemming from riots or other violent or destructive protest activities." Many riot statutes in the U.S. are broadly worded and can encompass non-violent protest activity. In the past, peaceful protesters have been prosecuted under these statutes. This bill could encourage an aggressive interpretation of riot statutes as well as other laws that could be used against peaceful demonstrators. On September 17, 2020, HR 8301 was introduced in the House of Representatives, which has nearly identical language to S 4424. (See full text of bill here)
Status: defeated / expired
Introduced 4 Aug 2020.
Issue(s): Riot
return to map
US Federal
S 4266 / HR 7786: Withhold Federal Funding for Failure to Either Prosecute or Properly Police a Riot
Would empower the U.S. Attorney General to withhold select federal funding if the Attorney General determines that a state or local government has a "custom or policy" of not prosecuting an individual engaged in unlawful activity as part of a "riot" or if they decline to prosecute because the "unlawful activity is related to or associated with expression of speech protected by the First Amendment". The U.S. Attorney General can also withhold select federal funding if a senior official, governing body, or policy prohibits law enforcement from taking action that would prevent or mitigate physical injury or property depredation related to a riot. The U.S. Attorney General could withhold up to 25% of select federal funding or twice the monetary value of property damaged or physical injury caused by the failure of the state or local government to take "reasonable steps" to protect against damage and injury. The bill also would create liability for "a person with the lawful authority to direct a law enforcement agency" to prohibit law enforcement from taking action that would prevent or materially mitigate significant injury or property destruction related to a riot. The bill defines "riot" using the broad federal definition. Such broadly worded riot provisions have been used to prosecute peaceful protesters in the past. This bill may pressure law enforcement to police assemblies aggressively to ensure that their policing practices are not second-guessed by the federal government resulting in loss of funding or because doing otherwise might open them up to civil litigation. The bill could also lead to the aggressive interpretation of riot statutes against peaceful protesters by prosecutors so as not to risk losing federal funding.
(
See full text of bill here)
Status: defeated / expired
Introduced 22 Jul 2020.
Issue(s): Police Response, Riot, State Liability
return to map
US Federal
HR 6054: Harsh penalties for protesters who conceal their identity
The "Unmask Antifa Act of 2018" would make it a federal crime, subject to a lengthy prison sentence, to wear a mask or other disguise while protesting in a "threatening" or "intimidating" way. Under the act, anyone who "injures, oppresses, threatens, or intimidates any person" while "in disguise, including while wearing a mask" could be sentenced to up to 15 years in prison as well as fined. The bill explicitly exempts police and other law enforcement agents, stating that "nothing in this section shall be construed so as to deter any law enforcement officer from lawfully carrying out the duties of his office." The name of the bill, introduced by Republican Rep. Daniel Donovan and supported by Reps. Peter King, Ted Budd, and Paul Gosar, refers to the leftist anti-Fascist movement, some members of which have worn masks during protests. The bill expired with the close of the 115th Congress on January 3, 2019. (See full text of bill here)
Status: defeated / expired
Introduced 8 Jun 2018.
Issue(s): Face Covering
return to map
