N.C. Senate Bill Promotes Controversial Increased Rioting Penalties Alongside Police Reform
North Carolina Senate Bill 300, sponsored by Senators Britt (R), Daniel (R), and Lee (R), was introduced on March 15th to reform policing in North Carolina and address some of the issues highlighted by the horrific death of George Floyd at the hands of Minneapolis police last summer. More controversially, the bill would reclassify rioting offenses from Class 1 misdemeanors to Class H or G felonies in response to violence that occurred during some protests over the summer.
The bill would do a number of things to benefit the hiring practices and training requirements of North Carolina law enforcement agencies. It would require more stringent background checks when hiring and certifying officers. It would increase the qualifications necessary to become a law enforcement officer, requiring crisis intervention training, education and training on civil unrest, and mental health screening, with annual mental health screenings required while employed. Officers would also be required to complete trainings that are not currently required by state law related to ethics, law enforcement mental health issues, community interaction, implicit bias, and racial equity. These stricter requirements would help exclude individuals predisposed to misconduct and provide officers with better resources to carry out their duties safely.
Additionally, the bill would create a new statewide database tracking “all disciplinary actions and decertifications of law enforcement officers in North Carolina,” and a statewide database that tracks all law enforcement interactions “involving any use of force by a law enforcement officer that results in death or serious bodily injury to a person.” Law enforcement agencies would also be required to maintain “law enforcement early warning system(s)” to help “correct law enforcement officer performance.” These changes would help to create the databases needed to improve hiring practices for law enforcement officers, better monitor and handle misconduct, and provide the necessary data to further inform police reform.
Though decriminalizing most violations of local ordinances, the Bill would dramatically increase the punishment for “willfully engag[ing] in a riot” from a class 1 misdemeanor to a class H or G felony, depending on aggravating factors. A class H felony carries a penalty of up to 25 months in prison. Britt said that these new changes are needed because “we want folks to know that it is our opinion that these crimes are serious” and “we hope that this will convey to them the need to actually prosecute crimes at a serious level.” These stipulations are seen as a legislative response to the property destruction that occurred after riotous events broke off of peaceful protests in Greensboro, Raleigh, Charlotte, and other cities during the George Floyd protests.
Some have suggested that the bill could lead to abuse by officers and prosecutors. What constitutes a riot is broad, and such changes could lead to baseless arrests with greater consequences. Kerwin Pittman, a North Carolina resident who helped organize protests over the summer, stated, “I have seen individuals who were out there peacefully protesting actually arrested for something somebody beside them did… We’re really walking a thin line when it comes to charging individuals, and especially upping the charge from a misdemeanor to a felony.” A felony charge can have personal and professional consequences even if one is acquitted. If, as Pittman suggests, officers wrongfully identify or intentionally arrest bystanders, the suggested laws could lead to grave miscarriages of justice.
Ann Webb, a Senior Policy Counsel with the American Civil Liberties Union of North Carolina, suggested that the definition of rioting is overbroad, leaving too much discretion to law enforcement. Webb argues that this could be particularly dangerous since “we’ve seen numerous incidents where people of color are targeted with charges like riots or disorderly conduct when the exact same actions by white protesters result in no arrests.” For his part, Senator Britt thinks that new required trainings assuage concerns of wrongful arrests and that this is not unlike other situations, where “folks are oftentimes charged simply for being in the wrong place at the wrong time.” His implication is that such cases would be sorted out in court, since rioting requires “willful” action.
As it stands, concerns about vagueness and potential for unequal application are compelling, but the Bill’s reforms are sorely needed in North Carolina. Britt has indicated a willingness to adjust the bill as conversations about law enforcement reform continue. A compromise could yet be made to satisfy the Republican’s desire to increase punishments for riotous behaviour, while also clarifying the vagueness in North Carolina’s rioting law and implementing these needed reforms for policing.