March 19, 2003

(Updated) Oregon Senate Bill Labels Protest 'Terrorism'

Note: This post has been updated. Any and all updates appear at the end of the original post.

I've been tracking this for some time now as part of that other project of which I'm a part, but since it has a direct bearing upon protests in the state of Oregon, it's a good time to pass it along here.

In the Oregon State Senate, there is a bill called SB 742, which, if passed, would introduce into state law the following definitions:

(1) A person commits the crime of terrorism if the person knowingly plans, participates in or carries out any act that is intended, by at least one of its participants, to disrupt:
(a) The free and orderly assembly of the inhabitants of the State of Oregon;
(b) Commerce or the transportation systems of the State of Oregon; or
(c) The educational of governmental institutions of the State of Oregon or its inhabitants.

A definition clearly tailored so broadly as to encompass many legitimate tactics of peaceful protest. Whether this was done out of intention or carelessness is, frankly, irrelevant, as such an undemocratic definition should never have been allowed in the text of a bill to begin with, regardless of the motivations behind it.

This coming Monday, March 24, there is a hearing of the Senate Judiciary Committee to discuss this bill, as announced by the ACLU of Oregon.

We need you in Salem at 8:00 a.m. on Monday [March 24]. SB 742 has been set for a hearing on Monday, March 24 at 8:00 a.m. in Senate Judiciary, Room 343.
SB 742 creates the crime of "terrorism" and defines it so broadly that individuals would be subject to life in prison if any other participant intended to disrupt commerce, transportation, educational, or governmental institutions (such as, strikes, protests, student food fights).
1) ATTEND MONDAY�S 8AM HEARING. We want to pack the room with as many of our supporters as possible. We�ll give you a sticker, identifying you as a supporter when you get to the hearing room.
**Please know that there will be amendments to Section 1 to limit the current drafted definition of "Terrorism." BUT -- there are no amendments to Section 2, that allows for law enforcement to ignore ORS 181.575 & ORS 181.850 if they are investigating "terrorism."

Those ORS 181 laws are another matter entirely, which I won't go into here. You can track information on that issue via the Portland Bill of Rights Defense Committee instead.

Meanwhile, if anyone out there intends to go to this hearing and can give me a ride to Salem for it, please get in touch.

Date Unknown

Update

Through the mail, the Portland Bill of Rights Defense Committee has received a response on SB 742 from Senator Kate Brown, who is the Senate Democratic Leader.

Posted at 01:45 PM | PermalinkComments (2) | TrackBacks (1)
More In Law Enforcement & Legal Issues, State of Oregon

« Previous Next »

Comments (2)

  1. Fred on 21 Mar 2003

    It's worded broadly enough ("an act that is intended...to disrupt:(c) The educational or governmental institutions of the State of Oregon") that even voting could be construed as terrorism (voting out the current pols would be "disrupting." I take some solace in the fact that any *sane* Court would throw this out without even looking at it. I balance that with the knowledge that we're living in insane times...

  2. DAVID MOWERS on 24 Mar 2003

    Heard about this on Alex Jones. I couldn't believe it I'm stunned. More people out east should hear about this.
    Good Luck defeating this Fascist garbage!

Trackbacks (1)

  1. Reveling in Frivolity on 19 Mar 2003

    Despite the discouraging news both globally and locally, rest assured this weblog will persist in its historically frivolous, faux sardonic manner. To wit, from an otherwise blasé article in the March 17, 2003 issue of "The New Yorker" entitled ...