Guest Blogger: Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act: Civil Rights at Risk
by Odette Wilkens
A recently enacted anti-terrorism law that received virtually no media coverage, could chill the free speech civil rights of American citizens who would advocate for labor, civil rights, the environment, as well as animals. It is the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act (AETA) and could potentially prosecute any American citizen trying to exercise their free speech rights even if they cause no harm or damage, or if they cause any corporate profit loss.
Simply stated, it prosecutes anyone who (1) uses interstate commerce, (2) intends to damage or interfere with an animal enterprise or with any person or entity associated with an animal enterprise and (3) causes any economic damage or corporate profit loss or bodily injury or fear of bodily injury. It also prosecutes for conspiracy or attempts to do any of the foregoing. AETA is a predicate for wiretapping.
The penalties are stepped up from 1 to 20 years for economic damage alone. Prison terms are up to 1 year for economic damage that is less than $10,000, up to 20 years for economic damage of over $1 million. There is a prison term of up to 1 year for having done no harm or damage.
AETA does not give a reasonable person fair notice of what is illegal. The likelihood of being prosecuted or wrongfully arrested is high since the threshold for meeting the elements for prosecution under AETA is low. Although AETA states exemptions for lawful boycotts and peaceful protests, they appear to constitute the very same elements as for AETA prosecution. What is a lawful boycott but where one intends to interfere with an entity and cause economic damage? What is a peaceful protest but where one intends to interfere with an entity but cause no economic damage? South Africa was boycotted until apartheid ended, and Martin Luther King orchestrated nation-wide lunch counter sit-ins to end discrimination and caused profit loss. Would those be terrorist acts under AETA?
The undefined terms “interfere” and “profit loss” make AETA very elastic. There is no exemption for profit loss under a lawful boycott or peaceful protest. “Animal enterprise” refers to virtually any U.S. retail business that sells animals or animal products for a profit; e.g., luncheonettes (sell eggs, meats), department stores (sell shoes, wool) and drugstores (sell premarin). An animal enterprise need not be lawful to be protected. That an animal enterprise is violating the law is not an affirmative defense for, e.g., whistle-blowing or undercover investigations into labor conditions, discrimination or environmental degradation.
Penalties far exceed those for otherwise violent or monetary crimes under the 2005 federal sentencing guidelines. Compare 20 years for profit loss to 4.5 years for sexual assault, 3 years for manslaughter and 4 months for embezzlement or larceny.
Although AETA provides restitution for businesses, no reciprocal economic or reputational restitution is provided for wrongful arrest or conviction. The financial burden of launching a defense would likely chill American citizens from exercising their First Amendment rights.
* * *
NYC Bar Association is holding a panel discussion on AETA on Tuesday, May 22, 2007, 6-9pm. It’s free and open to the public.