U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit deems Wisconsin’s law vague and overly broad, violating First Amendment rights
In a landmark ruling, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit has declared Wisconsin’s “hunter harassment law” unconstitutional. The law, amended in 2016, aimed to criminalize intentional interference with hunters, including actions such as maintaining proximity, approaching or confronting, and recording hunting activities. However, the court found that the law was vague, overly broad, and violated the First Amendment rights of the plaintiffs. This ruling has significant implications for both hunters and those who monitor and document hunting activities.
Wolf Patrol and the Fight Against Hunting
Wolf Patrol, an organization dedicated to opposing hunting and ensuring hunters comply with state regulations, played a central role in challenging the constitutionality of Wisconsin’s hunter harassment law. The plaintiffs, associated with Wolf Patrol, engaged in monitoring and documenting hunting activities on public lands throughout Wisconsin. Their goal was to ensure that hunters followed the rules and regulations governing their activities.
Confrontations and Harassment
While carrying out their monitoring and documenting activities, the plaintiffs encountered numerous instances of harassment from hunters and law enforcement officers. These encounters included repeated stops for questioning by law enforcement and verbal abuse from hunters. In one particularly significant incident, a group of hunters surrounded the plaintiffs with their trucks, barricading them in while law enforcement was called. The hunters verbally berated the Wolf Patrol members, using foul language and making threats of physical violence. One hunter even used his truck to repeatedly bump a member of the Wolf Patrol.
Seizure of Filming Equipment and Footage
During the confrontations, law enforcement seized the filming equipment and footage of one of the plaintiffs, Brown. Deputies believed that Brown’s footage could potentially serve as evidence of violations of Wisconsin’s hunter harassment law. They confiscated four cameras, two memory cards, a microphone, batteries, all videography accessories, and a cellphone. Law enforcement informed Brown that they would be seeking a warrant to search his footage. Twelve days later, deputies obtained a warrant and searched Brown’s devices, viewing all the seized videos and footage. However, the district attorney ultimately declined to bring charges. It took approximately seven months for Brown’s equipment and recordings to be returned to him.
Lawsuit and Constitutional Challenge
In July 2017, the plaintiffs filed a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the amendment. They argued that the law was unconstitutionally vague, overbroad, and chilled their First Amendment rights. The trial court ruled in favor of the defendants, but the plaintiffs appealed to the 7th Circuit.
Vague and Overly Broad
The 7th Circuit ruled that the amendment was both vague and overly broad. The provisions prohibiting “maintaining a physical proximity” and “approaching or confronting” were found to lack reasonable notice regarding what conduct is criminal and failed to provide sufficient constraints on the discretion of enforcement officials. As a result, these provisions created a chilling effect on constitutionally protected activities. The section of the amendment that prohibited photographing or videotaping was found to be clear but overly broad, encompassing permissible activity in public areas. The court concluded that this provision was specifically designed to suppress First Amendment activities critical of hunting, constituting unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination.
Conclusion:
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit’s ruling declaring Wisconsin’s “hunter harassment law” unconstitutional marks a significant victory for First Amendment rights. The court found that the law’s provisions were vague, overly broad, and targeted recording activities critical of hunting. This ruling serves as a reminder of the importance of protecting free speech and ensuring that laws do not unduly restrict constitutionally protected activities. It also highlights the role of organizations like Wolf Patrol in advocating for transparency and accountability in hunting practices.
Leave a Reply