Intro || Talking Points || Bills || Press Clips

ALEC’S ANIMAL AND ECOLOGICAL TERRORISM ACT

Introduction

In December 2002, the Criminal Justice Task Force of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) endorsed a model “Animal and Ecological Terrorism Act.” The US Sportsmen’s Alliance, an organization whose business partners include the Associated Fur Industries of Chicagoland, Remington Arms Company, and the outdoor gear retailer Cabela’s(1), helped write the legislation and is now promoting it to state legislators across the country. ALEC’s fact sheet on the Act states, “This bill does not inhibit one’s right to free speech,”(2) but even a brief reading suggests otherwise.

The legislation’s vague language and increased penalties for violent crimes already covered under existing laws are designed not to protect hunting, fishing, livestock farms and animal research facilities, but to suppress legitimate environmental, animal rights, and family farm advocacy. The Act defines an “animal or ecological terrorist organization” as “two or more persons with the primary or incidental purpose of supporting any politically motivated activity... intended to obstruct, impede or deter any person from participating in a lawful animal activity” or in “mining, foresting, harvesting, gathering, or processing natural resources.” This and other passages in the Act could be used to prosecute mainstream environmental groups engaged in nonviolent advocacy work. People providing support to such organizations – even in the innocuous form of a monetary contribution – could also be prosecuted.

In addition, the ALEC legislation’s last section creates a “terrorist registry” managed by each state’s Attorney General. Anyone pleading guilty to or convicted of “animal and ecological terrorism” would have their name, address, signature, and picture displayed on a website for at least three years, “at which time the registrant may apply to the Attorney General for removal.” This provision could not only stigmatize nonviolent environmental activists as terrorists but also adds insult to injury by putting the burden on them to remove their name from the “terrorist registry.”

State Representative Ray Allen, the chair of ALEC’s Criminal Justice Task Force, introduced his version of the Act in the Texas House. He stated that the measure is needed to counter “growing violence among the growing fringe of animal rights groups and eco-freaks.”(3) The bill has also been introduced in New York, South Carolina, Arizona, and Washington. As of June 2004, it has yet to become law in any state, but ALEC has prioritized passage of the Act during upcoming state legislative sessions.

There are small, radical fringe groups like the Animal Liberation Front and Earth Liberation Front that have engaged in property destruction and other violent acts to protest what they see as serious environmental threats or animal rights’ abuses. According to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, “the frequency and aggressiveness of [eco-terrorist] attacks is on the increase.” Yet the vast majority of environmental, animal rights, and family farm organizations that do not condone trespassing, violence, property damage, or any other criminal activity could also be targeted under the ALEC legislation, with serious ramifications for the constitutionally-guaranteed freedoms of speech, press, and assembly. Since the acts that the ALEC bill claims to target are already covered under existing laws, a more fitting response to the problem would be to increase efforts to investigate and prosecute violent fringe groups, as the FBI is already doing.

back to top

Talking Points

  • ALEC’s Animal and Ecological Terrorist Act’s definitions of “animal and ecological terrorism” and “terrorist organizations” are so vague that mainstream, law-abiding environmental, animal rights, and family farm organizations and their supporters could be prosecuted under its terms.
  • The Center for Constitutional Right’s vice-president, human rights lawyer Michael Ratner, called sections of the ALEC bill “so broad they sweep within them basically every environmental and animal rights organization in the country.”
  • Acts of property destruction, arson, and assault that ALEC claims necessitate its draconian Act are already covered under existing laws, as can be demonstrated by the successful prosecution of past fringe group attacks and by ongoing FBI efforts.
  • The bill language places severe restrictions on individuals’ First Amendment rights and, by singling out certain kinds of advocacy, denies environmental, animal rights, and family farm advocates equal protection under the Fourteenth Amendment.
  • The Act, by focusing on environmental and animal rights activism, implies that advocates on these issues are unusually prone to criminal activity.
  • The legislation’s proposed “terrorist registry” is an unprecedented invasion of privacy that ALEC and its supporters have not even tried to justify in terms of recidivism rates or other criminal justice data.
  • The bill cynically exploits past tragedy and the current political climate by labeling as “terrorism” legitimate political activity.

back to top

Links to Relevant Bills

Arizona
HB 2367 (Introduced 1/26/04; Withdrawn 3/15/04)

SB 1081 (Introduced 1/14/04; Vetoed by Governor 5/12/04)

Hawaii
HB 2550 (Introduced 1/27/04; Referred to AGR/EEP, JUD 1/30/04)

New York
S 2996 (Introduced 3/13/03; Referred to Consumer Protection 1/7/04)

A 4884 (Introduced 2/20/03; Referred to Agriculture 1/7/04)

Pennsylvania
SB 1257 (Introduced 1/10/02; Referred to Environmental Resources and Energy 6/17/02)

South Carolina
H 4439 (Prefiled 12/3/03; Referred to Committee on Agriculture, Natural Resources, and Environmental Affairs 1/13/04)

Texas
HB 2510 (Introduced 3/12/03; Left pending in Agriculture and Livestock 4/10/03)

HB 433 (Introduced 1/16/03; Read and referred to Defense Affairs and State-Federal Relations 2/10/03)

Washington
SB 6114 (Prefiled 12/10/03; Referred to Ways & Means 1/30/04)

back to top

Press Clips

back to top

 
Sources:
(1) “U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance Partner Links.” U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance. 13 August 2003 <http://www.ussportsmen.org/interactive/features/PARTNERLINKS.CFM>.
(2) “Animal Rights and Ecological Terrorism Fact Sheet.” American Legislative Exchange Council. 13 August 2003 <http://www.alec.org/viewpage.cfm?pgname=2.59951>.
(3) “Measure targets eco-terrorism.” Texas Star-Telegram. 20 February 2003.
(4) Jarboe, James F. “Inside the FBI: Eco-Terrorism.” Interview with James F. Jarboe, Domestic Terrorism Section Chief. Washington Post. 27 February 2002. 18 August 2003 <http://discuss.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/zforum/02/fbi0227.htm>.
(5) Charman, Karen. “Environmentalists=Terrorists: The New Math.” 8 May 2003. TomPaine.common sense. 15 August 2003 <http://www.tompaine.com/feature2.cfm/ID/7748>.
This page was last updated on 7/8/04.

The SERC project has been discontinued due to lack of funding. We apologize, but it’s unlikely that we’ll be able to respond to requests for information about the material posted on this site.
State Environmental Resource Center
Madison, Wisconsin