New law may infringe on First Amendment rights

On March 9, 2012 President Barack Obama signed bill H.R. 347, the Federal Restricted Building and Grounds Improvement Act of 2011, into law.

H.R. 347 is a modification of the Senate bill S. 1794, which restricts people from entering or blocking public areas that are closed off by Secret Service while a person under their protection is passing through the area.

The law also includes major public events, such as inaugurations and presidential campaigns.

The new law removed the word “willfully” from the paragraph in the original law, which states that a person can be prosecuted if he or she enters the area “willfully and knowingly.”

The new law would make it illegal to enter or remain in an area where an official is visiting, even if the person does not know it is illegal.

Some critics have said the modified bill is an infringement on their First Amendment rights, while many supporters of the bill have said H.R. 347 does not affect anyone’s right to protest anywhere at any time.

Former GOP Chairman Michael Mahaffey said, “Right now, it is not a federal violation to jump the fence and run across the White House lawn, and this bill makes it a federal violation.”

Connie Jorgenson, Assistant Professor of Political Science at Piedmont Virginia Community College, said, “It will be interesting to see what will rise from the passing of this bill. I would also not be surprised if this bill ends up in court.”

The timing of the bill is also interesting, as it follows a number of months of protest, including the growing Occupy Movement, though no clear link is made.

Jorgenson said, “It’s just too hard to tell if the amended bill came out of the Occupy Movement or if it was actually made to further protect people under the protection of the Secret Service.”

Campuses are hotbeds for political thought of all kinds and many social justice movements have either come about or gained momentum on them.

With many college students across the country also participating in various protests, some of which may come into conflict this new law, whether it will have an impact on them has yet to be seen.

“Either way, we have to be careful. It is easy to take away someone’s rights, but once those rights are taken away, it is hard to give them back,” Jorgenson said.