Riot bill shelved by Assembly Committee

Yahoo

21-05-2025

Protesters gather to march in Wauwatosa alongside the families of Antonio Gonzales, Jay Anderson Jr., and Alvin Cole in 2020. (Photo by Isiah Holmes/Wisconsin Examiner)
A Republican-sponsored bill that would have defined a riot as a gathering of at least three people that could pose a threat of property damage or injury has been removed from the Assembly Judiciary Committee's executive session agenda. The bill has been criticized for being overly broad, and potentially chilling First Amendment protections of protest and free speech. Besides defining a riot, the bill also exposed accused rioters and riot organizers to felony charges and civil liability including restitution for attorneys' fees and property damage, and carried a prohibition on government officials with authority over law enforcement from limiting an agency's response to quell unrest.
Rep. Andrew Hysell (D- Sun Prairie), a member of the Assembly Committee on Judiciary, said that he criticized the bill because it 'actually weakens existing law for the very people it was supposed to help.' The committee held a public hearing on the bill on May 7, at which a large number of Wisconsinites voiced opposition to the bill. Rep. Shae Sortwell (R- Two Rivers), one of the bill's authors, testified in favor of the bill, saying that it's needed to prevent protests from spinning out of control into riots, property destruction, and injury. Sortwell and other republican supporters of the bill referenced protests and unrest in 2020 in Kenosha and Madison.
Among those who testified against the bill was Rep. Ryan Clancy (D-Madison). Like other critics, Clancy said the bill was written vaguely in order to be applied broadly to crack down on protest movements. 'While myself and many of my Democratic colleagues are tired of wasting our time and our constituents' resources on badly written, unconstitutional bills like AB-88, I'm ecstatic that Republicans have abandoned this one for now,' Clancy said in a statement after the bill was shelved by the Assembly committee. 'It's clear that passionate, thoughtful testimony from the public, free speech advocates and civil rights experts – along with excellent technical critiques from Rep. Andrew Hysell – has stopped this so-called 'anti-riot' bill dead in its tracks.'
Clancy added that 'in reality, however, this isn't an 'anti-riot' bill: it's a threat to free speech, expression and assembly disguised as a public safety measure. Thankfully, it's now unlikely to move forward this session.'
During the May 7 committee hearing where people spoke either in favor of or against the bill, one man wore a hat which used an expletive to denounce President Donald Trump. Committee Chair Ron Tulser (R- Harrison) demanded that the man remove the hat because it was offensive. Tulser threatened to have law enforcement remove the man, and called the hearing into recess. Later, when the hearing continued, the man was allowed to continue wearing the hat. Clancy told Tulser his emotional reaction to the hat and his impulse to call for police was an example of how a broad, penalty-heavy bill for protests like AB-88 is a bad idea.
In his statement, Clancy urged his colleagues to spend 'less time trying to dismantle our rights and getting angry at rude hats' and more time 'addressing the actual needs of Wisconsin residents. Until that changes, we must all remain vigilant to fight back their next, terrible idea.'
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX