The Charlottesville Car Attack Might Have Been Legal Under These Republican Proposals

Several anti-protest bills would limit motorists’ liability if they injure or even kill protesters.

Ryan M. Kelly/AP Photo

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

On Saturday in Charlottesville, Virginia, 20-year-old James Alex Fields Jr. plowed his Dodge Challenger into a crowd of protesters, killing one and maiming 19, before reversing out of the crowd and speeding away. Fields now faces one count of second-degree murder and three counts of malicious wounding, as well as one count of hit-and-run. His fate, though, could prove quite different if certain Republican legislators were to have their way.

Back in January, a state representative from North Dakota, Republican Keith Kempenich, started what would become a bleak trend: He proposed a piece of legislation that would waive a motorist’s liability for any damages caused by striking any person who was “obstructing vehicular traffic on a public road, street, or highway,” including injury or death. Kempenich’s proposal was born in the wake of the Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPLprotests and was a not-so-subtle jab at the anti-DAPL crowds that stalled construction on the pipeline, in part, by blocking area roads

Kempenich explained at the time how protesters on the road were catching drivers off guard—“This isn’t their issue,” Kempenich said of motorists—but lamented the fact that, “if something had happened, [motorists would] wind up being accused of it.” He added that when a protester “comes up on the roadway and challenges a motorist… that’s an intentional act of intimidation—the definition of terrorism.”

While Kempenich’s bill died on the House floor in February, it still managed to get 41 yea-votes and to inspire a litany of similarly ill-conceived, GOP-sponsored proposals in statehouses across country. The proposed laws are part of a broad array of anti-protest bills drafted in the wake of Black Lives Matter demonstrations and anti-Trump marches. 

Here, we breakdown some other equally short-sighted bills:

  • North Carolina: House Bill 330, introduced by Republican representative Justin Burr in March, sets aside civil liability penalties for any motorist who strikes and injures a protester with his or her car, so long as the protest doesn’t have a permit. The bill passed the North Carolina General Assembly 67-to-48 back in May and is currently waiting for action in the state Senate
  • Tennessee: Introduced in early February by Republican state Sen. Bill Ketron and Republican Assembly Member Matthew Hill, Senate Bill 944 and House Bill 668 would have excused any motorist who injured another person participating in a protest or demonstration on a public right-of-way from civil liability for such injury, so long as the motorist was “exercising due care” when the injury occurred. The assembly bill died in the civil justice committee in March, while Senate Bill 944 is still under committee consideration.
  • Texas: House Bill 250, introduced by Republican state representative Republican Pat Fallon, would similarly absolve drivers of civil liability should they crash into protesters while exercising “due care.” The bill is currently in committee in the state’s House of Representatives, though Fallon insists his bill would not apply to the “jackass” who mowed down protesters in Virginia.
  • Rhode Island: Justin Price, a Republican representative from Exeter, introduced H 5690 in the Rhode Island House on March 1. As you might expect, it waives civil liability for any injury or death caused when a car crashes into a protest occurring on a public roadway so long as the driver was exercising “due care.” The bill is on hold, pending further study
  • Florida: In late February, Republican state Sen. George Gainer introduced Senate Bill 1096. Had it not died in the state Senate’s criminal justice subcommittee, Gainer’s bill would have made protesting in the streets a second-degree misdemeanor and waived motorist liability for the unintentional injury or death of a protester. A parallel House-level bill, introduced by Republican Jayer Williamson, met a similar fate. 

AN IMPORTANT UPDATE ON MOTHER JONES' FINANCES

We need to start being more upfront about how hard it is keeping a newsroom like Mother Jones afloat these days.

Because it is, and because we're fresh off finishing a fiscal year, on June 30, that came up a bit short of where we needed to be. And this next one simply has to be a year of growth—particularly for donations from online readers to help counter the brutal economics of journalism right now.

Straight up: We need this pitch, what you're reading right now, to start earning significantly more donations than normal. We need people who care enough about Mother Jones’ journalism to be reading a blurb like this to decide to pitch in and support it if you can right now.

Urgent, for sure. But it's not all doom and gloom!

Because over the challenging last year, and thanks to feedback from readers, we've started to see a better way to go about asking you to support our work: Level-headedly communicating the urgency of hitting our fundraising goals, being transparent about our finances, challenges, and opportunities, and explaining how being funded primarily by donations big and small, from ordinary (and extraordinary!) people like you, is the thing that lets us do the type of journalism you look to Mother Jones for—that is so very much needed right now.

And it's really been resonating with folks! Thankfully. Because corporations, powerful people with deep pockets, and market forces will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists to do. Only people like you will.

There's more about our finances in "News Never Pays," or "It's Not a Crisis. This Is the New Normal," and we'll have details about the year ahead for you soon. But we already know this: The fundraising for our next deadline, $350,000 by the time September 30 rolls around, has to start now, and it has to be stronger than normal so that we don't fall behind and risk coming up short again.

Please consider pitching in before moving on to whatever it is you're about to do next. We really need to see if we'll be able to raise more with this real estate on a daily basis than we have been, so we're hoping to see a promising start.

—Monika Bauerlein, CEO, and Brian Hiatt, Online Membership Director

payment methods

AN IMPORTANT UPDATE ON MOTHER JONES' FINANCES

We need to start being more upfront about how hard it is keeping a newsroom like Mother Jones afloat these days.

Because it is, and because we're fresh off finishing a fiscal year, on June 30, that came up a bit short of where we needed to be. And this next one simply has to be a year of growth—particularly for donations from online readers to help counter the brutal economics of journalism right now.

Straight up: We need this pitch, what you're reading right now, to start earning significantly more donations than normal. We need people who care enough about Mother Jones’ journalism to be reading a blurb like this to decide to pitch in and support it if you can right now.

Urgent, for sure. But it's not all doom and gloom!

Because over the challenging last year, and thanks to feedback from readers, we've started to see a better way to go about asking you to support our work: Level-headedly communicating the urgency of hitting our fundraising goals, being transparent about our finances, challenges, and opportunities, and explaining how being funded primarily by donations big and small, from ordinary (and extraordinary!) people like you, is the thing that lets us do the type of journalism you look to Mother Jones for—that is so very much needed right now.

And it's really been resonating with folks! Thankfully. Because corporations, powerful people with deep pockets, and market forces will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists to do. Only people like you will.

There's more about our finances in "News Never Pays," or "It's Not a Crisis. This Is the New Normal," and we'll have details about the year ahead for you soon. But we already know this: The fundraising for our next deadline, $350,000 by the time September 30 rolls around, has to start now, and it has to be stronger than normal so that we don't fall behind and risk coming up short again.

Please consider pitching in before moving on to whatever it is you're about to do next. We really need to see if we'll be able to raise more with this real estate on a daily basis than we have been, so we're hoping to see a promising start.

—Monika Bauerlein, CEO, and Brian Hiatt, Online Membership Director

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate