Heinert attempts to create new law to criminalize speaking against politicians. This should not happen in America.

Democrat State Senator Troy Heinert has introduced a measure in the State Senate that might seem acceptable to its sponsors on the surface, but ultimately comes off as an anti-speech measure designed by politicians to prevent already protected criticism of elected officials:

SENATE BILL NO. 139
Introduced by: Senators Heinert and Kennedy and Representative Saba

FOR AN ACT ENTITLED, An Act to prohibit the publication of false information in certain political advertisements.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF SOUTH DAKOTA:
Section 1. That chapter 12-26 be amended by adding a NEW SECTION to read:
No person may knowingly make, publish, broadcast, circulate or cause the making, publication, broadcast, or circulation in any letter, circular, advertisement, poster, or in any other communication any false statement designed to affect the vote on any issue submitted to the electors at any election or relating to any candidate for election to public office.

A violation of this section is a Class 1 misdemeanor.

Section 2. That chapter 12-26 be amended by adding a NEW SECTION to read:
No person may recklessly make, publish, broadcast, circulate or cause the making, publication, broadcast, or circulation in any letter, circular, advertisement, poster, or in any other communication any false statement designed to affect the vote on any issue submitted to the electors at any election or relating to any candidate for election to public office.

A violation of this section is a Class 2 misdemeanor.

Any person convicted of a violation under this section shall be assessed a civil penalty at the time of sentencing in addition to, and not in substitution for, any other penalties provided by law for the offense in the amount of one hundred dollars for each violation. The civil penalty shall be deposited in the state general fund.

Follow the measure here.

There are already protections – and remedies – in law regarding defamatory speech. And when it comes to public officials, the law has previously determined that there’s a lot of leeway when it comes to speech about public officials, because it’s important to not infringe on our rights to free speech.

But that’s the opposite of what this bill does. For a politician to attempt to level the playing field in the favor in this manner is troubling, to say the least.

Heinert’s bill is demanding that a new speech ban be placed into law, and to associate it with a new criminal penalty.  Yes, Senator Heinert and his fellow Democrats are actually demanding that people be prosecuted criminally if their opponent says bad things about them.

The measure purports to ban the publication of false information… but who decides what is false information, and what isn’t?

Threatening a lawsuit because you disagree with how a political opponent characterizes you or your measure is one thing. In fact, it’s par for the course. It happens all the time. But what Heinert is proposing is beyond the pale.  Heinert’s measure would create a new class of laws granting criminal penalties for speaking out against politicians.  That in and of itself should scare the pants off of anyone for how that measure would affect free speech in our country.

Not only should this bill be slammed in public and as part of the legislative process, but I predict this bill is going to come back to haunt the sponsors of this measure in the next election. As it should.

Involving the full force of the state to criminally prosecute political speech against a politician because you might disagree with is abhorrent, and not what we do in America.

9 thoughts on “Heinert attempts to create new law to criminalize speaking against politicians. This should not happen in America.”

  1. Umm, isn’t there an active lawsuit due to the Speaker of the House removing a lobbyist for saying mean things about certain legislators?

    Not sure the GOP can necessarily claim the moral high ground on the topic of political censorship right now. I mean, I’m not saying you’re wrong in the least bit, but don’t go thinking GOP poo doesn’t smell.

  2. There is a difference between a civil action and one of criminal nature. Hard to imagine the ACLU isn’t all over this, oh wait, a liberal brought it so it’s fine!

    1. The ACLU is already working to protect Republican voters this year in Benisek v. Lamone, a gerrymandering case out of Maryland. They aren’t your enemy.

  3. His opponent must’ve really gotten to him in the last election. First, the only Democrat in the whole legislature to vote for SB 47 and now this. Heinert is running scared.

  4. It would be the kiss of death for the Lautenschlaghers and their income generating lying postcards from SDGO!

    South Dakota’s slander laws are in desperate need of updating. Today you have to somehow prove a financial loss in order to sue successfully. Reputations obviously aren’t important.

    1. Charlie it surprised me to find out you were anti-gun 2nd Amendment and promoted Veganism on top of that! Where’s the Beef?

  5. Will there be a new board or commission to determine what is false? Or will this simply allow candidates to make charges that their opponent has spoken falsely, grab the headlines and then await a court action that won’t come until after the election.

Comments are closed.