Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis. Paul Hennessy/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images
On Thursday, a federal judge blocked Florida's controversial anti-riot law.
Gov. Ron DeSantis championed the law, which criminalizes violent protests.
It was sued by civil rights groups, who claimed it violated First Amendment rights and discriminated against Black people.
Check out more stories from Insider's business page.
On Thursday, a federal judge blocked Florida's anti-riot law. Gov. Ron DeSantis supported the law as a way of reducing violent protests in the state.
Northern Florida District Judge Mark Walker stated that the order binds Florida agents, employees and attorneys, according to court documents. He also blocked enforcement of law under the definition "riot."
According to court documents, a "riot" is defined by the state as "three or more people participating or causing property damage or injury to another person." The Dream Defenders is a coalition advocating for the abolishment of jails and police. They sued the state, claiming that the new definition of "riot" was too vague.
Walker agreed with Freedom Defenders' claim that the law was too vague as it didn't clarify whether peaceful protests that became violent can be charged. Walker stated in the ruling that innocent people could be prosecuted if the state defines a riot.
Walker wrote that "if this court doesn't enjoin statute's enforcement the lawless actions a few individuals could effectively criminalize protected speech of hundreds, or even thousands, of law-abiding Floridians."
Walker stated that the state cannot give a new definition to the term "riot", but it can still suppress them.
The law, signed by DeSantis on April 1, criminalizes violent protests. Protests that turn violent can be called mob intimidation, a first-degree misdemeanor which can lead to a maximum of one year imprisonment. ABC News reported that protests can also be called "riot" and are a second-degree felony with a maximum sentence of 15 years imprisonment.
Continue the story
A few civil rights groups filed lawsuits against the law, claiming that it violated First Amendment rights and discriminated against Black people. Walker stated in his ruling that while the plaintiffs claimed that the law was meant to address racial justice protests in 2020, Walker feared that it would have far more serious consequences.
Walker wrote that even though plaintiffs claim they fear it will be used against their members based on their skin color or the messages they send, its vagueness allows those in power to use its enforcement against any group that wishes to express any message the government disapproves.
Business Insider has the original article.
