California bill to combat ‘hate litter’ signed into law

A bill to address “hate litter” across California was signed into law by Governor Gavin Newsom on Wednesday.

Assembly Bill 3024, introduced by Asm. Chris Ward (D-San Diego) expands civil rights protections against the distribution of materials such as flyers or pamphlets that contain threatening statements with the intent to intimidate members of a protected class.

The practice, also known as “hate litter,” has become an increasing problem for neighborhoods across the Golden State, reflecting a broader nationwide wave of hate crimes based on race, religion or sexual orientation.

The newly signed law will allow those targeted by hateful litter to seek civil damages from the person behind the spread of that material. These protections are effective immediately.

“The act of hate speech goes beyond what is intended in our First Amendment protections,” Ward said in a statement about Newsom’s signing of AB 3024.

“When hate groups deliberately enter Jewish communities to leave anti-Semitic flyers on their victims’ doorsteps, vehicles and personal belongings in an effort to intimidate and harass them where they live, that is not freedom of speech,” Ward continued. to pit neighbor against neighbor, and it makes the people these flyers target afraid to be themselves and live their lives in their own neighborhoods.

AB 3024 builds on a landmark civil rights law in California, the Ralph Civil Rights Act of 1976, which made it illegal to threaten or carry out violence against an individual because of their actual or perceived characteristics, such as race, religion, or sexual orientation .

The law was a direct response to intimidation tactics largely associated with white nationalist hate groups such as the Ku Klux Klan, such as burning or desecrating a cross outside one’s home with the intent to threaten its owner.

Supporters of AB 3024 argued that necessary updates would be made to strengthen the protections under California’s civil rights law by incorporating the strategies of modern hate-based groups.

Critics, on the other hand, worried that the measure could lead to overly broad restrictions on speech, given the often anonymous nature of the practice.