Bill banning protests near religious services in Georgia sparks First Amendment concerns 

Senate Bill 591, sponsored by Dahlonega Republican Sen. Steve Gooch, passed the Senate earlier this month with a 39-to-13 vote with Republicans unified in support and Democrats split. It is on its way to the state House after unanimously moving through a House committee Tuesday.

The First Amendment provides protections for religious liberty and free speech, but what happens when those rights come into conflict?

The Georgia Legislature is attempting to answer that question with a bill banning protests outside religious services.

Senate Bill 591, sponsored by Dahlonega Republican Sen. Steve Gooch, who is a candidate for lieutenant governor, passed the Senate earlier this month with a 39-to-13 vote with Republicans unified in support and Democrats split. It is on its way to the state House after unanimously moving through a House committee Tuesday.

If it passes there and receives Gov. Brian Kemp’s signature, protests deemed to be disruptive would be banned within 500 feet of a religious service, starting an hour before it is set to begin and ending an hour after the posted end time.

“It basically is just a measure to protect religious freedom and ensure worshipers are shielded from harassment or protestors storming a service,” said Mike Griffin, spokesman for the Georgia Baptist Mission Board, which supports the bill.

Violating the law would be a misdemeanor, which could be punishable by a fine of up to $1,000 dollars or up to a year in jail, at a judge’s discretion.

Funerals and memorial services already have the same protection under Georgia law, but this year’s new proposal would also boost the penalty for disrupting a military funeral. The bill makes doing so a high and aggravated misdemeanor, which could result in a fine of up to $5,000, a year in jail or both.

The proposed law comes after a protest at Cities Church in St. Paul, Minnesota caught national attention. A pastor there is also an official with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and the incident came during a major ICE crackdown and after agents killed an unarmed civilian.

Demonstrators were seen on video entering the church sanctuary and chanting slogans like “ICE out” while leaders were trying to conduct services.

Federal agents arrested two journalists who covered the protest, Georgia Fort and Don Lemon, which increased the incident’s notoriety and introduced questions of press freedom.

Another incident at New Birth Missionary Baptist Church in Stonecrest went viral earlier this year when cell phone video showed a white man shouting about hellfire and damnation at worshippers inside the progressive church with a predominantly Black congregation.

Jewish leaders around the nation have also reported an uptick in anti-Israel protests outside synagogues since Oct. 7, 2023.

A number of states have sought to create or bolster laws aimed at protecting worshippers from disruptive protests following the Minnesota incident.

In Oklahoma, the Republican governor signed a bill requiring protesters within 100 feet of a place of worship to stay 8 feet from worshippers, unless invited to approach.

South Dakota’s Republican governor signed into law a bill making it a felony to intentionally prevent another person from performing any lawful religious act. That was previously a misdemeanor in the state.

Other states have introduced but not yet passed similar legislation. Those states include Louisiana, Idaho, Ohio and Alabama, where a bill would make it a felony to knowingly engage in a riot, disorderly conduct or harassment, or to block the entrance or exit to a house of worship with the intent to disrupt a service.

But Nora Benavidez, senior counsel at the national nonprofit Free Press and a board member of the Georgia First Amendment Foundation, called these bills unnecessary and said some of them may infringe on the First Amendment.

“Religious freedom questions or press freedom questions, all of these are things that are already baked into the First Amendment, and so there’s no need to be messing with and tweaking them or creating a hierarchy of those freedoms and liberties,” she said.

Benavidez said people who enter religious buildings and don’t leave when asked to could already face low level misdemeanor charges for trespassing. She worries the new bill could inadvertently make it harder for police officers to protect people’s rights.

“The language that has been added to existing code so muddies the water from a constitutional perspective that I ultimately think it will be a disservice for law enforcement who won’t know how to deal with this,” she said. “And problematic in the kind of future litigation challenging this bill if it becomes law.”

If the bill is to become law, it will need to pass the House before April 2, the final day of this year’s legislative session.

SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE