Animal Enterprise Terror!

The administration pushed very hard to ensure that the detention bill and the Patriot Act applied equally to citizens and non-citizens alike. Civil Liberty activists, myself included, expressed concern that by redefining ordinary criminal acts as “terrorism” the government would have almost limitless power to arrest prosecute and convict Americans without any of the protections afforded by the Constitution.
It appears that our worst fears are coming to pass. The Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act (H.R. 4239) would label a wide range of activism as “terrorism” if it “damages” an animal enterprise, or any business connected to an animal enterprise. The goal of the legislation is to, “To provide the Department of Justice the necessary authority to apprehend, prosecute, and convict individuals committing animal enterprise terror.” Animal enterprise terror?

The AETA has passed the Senate unanimously and is currently pending in the House. Industry groups are trying to steamroll it through Congress as soon as lawmakers return from recess November 13. Rather than just affecting a small number of PETA people, The AETA has the potential to impact all kinds of activists, including environmentalists, and social justice advocates. Animal activists may be the first target of the administration but they won’t be the last.

This bill, like most others seeking to give the government unfettered discretion to decide who is a terrorist is overly broad and vaguely drafted. It includes penalties for “non-violent physical obstruction” and actions that do not harm people or property such as civil disobedience and whistle blowing. The ACLU is concerned about the vagueness of the bill. They note on their web-site that:

“Alarmingly, the bill would also make the expanded crime a predicate for Title III federal criminal wiretapping. This provision could be used for widespread domestic surveillance of animal rights organizations. A court will be far more likely to find probable cause for a vague crime of causing economic damage or disruption to an animal enterprise than for a crime that requires some evidence that the organization plans to engage in activity causing illegal “physical disruption.”

The effect of labeling nonviolent actions as “terrorism” and prosecuting them as federal crimes isn’t new to this administration; the suppression of free speech is a natural outflow of subjecting peaceful protesters to federal prosecution and will have its intended chilling effect. What is really egregious about this bill is that it conflates national security with agribusiness profits. Corporate Profits shouldn’t be a National Security Priority and the government shouldn’t be defining people who chain themselves to trees or release bunny rabbits from laboratories as terrorists. What’s next for god sake, Librarians? Oh, right, the Patriot Act already took care of the librarians.