Republican lawmakers have unveiled the “Safe and Open Streets Act” that could put road-blocking protesters behind bars for up to five years, striking back against increasingly disruptive demonstrations that have paralyzed American cities.
Key Takeaways
- Senator Thom Tillis is leading legislation to make intentionally blocking roadways a federal crime punishable by fines or up to five years imprisonment
- The bill responds to recent protests in Los Angeles, North Carolina, and Virginia where demonstrators obstructed traffic, endangering public safety and emergency services
- Republican supporters including Senators Ted Budd, Marsha Blackburn, and Tommy Tuberville argue current local laws are inadequately enforced
- The debate intersects with President Trump’s call to ban masks at protests, creating tension between public safety concerns and First Amendment protections
- Supporters emphasize the right to protest without disrupting commerce and endangering others’ safety
Federal Crime for Road-Blocking Protests
A group of Republican senators, spearheaded by North Carolina’s Thom Tillis, has introduced the “Safe and Open Streets Act” aimed at stemming the tide of protesters who deliberately obstruct roadways. The legislation would establish federal penalties for those who intentionally block traffic, including fines and prison sentences of up to five years. The bill represents a significant escalation in the response to what many conservatives view as increasingly dangerous protest tactics that threaten public safety, emergency services, and everyday Americans trying to go about their business.
“The emerging tactic of radical protesters blocking roads and stopping commerce is not only obnoxious to innocent commuters, but it’s also dangerous and will eventually get people killed. It needs to be a crime throughout the country,” said Senator Thom Tillis.
Recent demonstrations in Los Angeles saw anti-ICE protesters block roads and allegedly attack officers, while similar incidents in North Carolina and Virginia involved pro-Palestinian activists shutting down highways. In Durham, vehicles were blocked for hours on I-70, creating gridlock that could have prevented emergency services from reaching those in need. Currently, states like California technically have laws against such obstruction, but critics say these regulations are rarely enforced by Democrat-run jurisdictions.
Republican Support and Justification
The proposed legislation has garnered strong support from several prominent Republican senators. Senator Ted Budd of North Carolina has emphasized the risks posed to public safety when emergency vehicles cannot navigate blocked roadways. Senator Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee has characterized the street-blocking tactics as “lawlessness” that demands a federal response, particularly when local authorities fail to maintain order and protect the rights of law-abiding citizens to travel freely on public thoroughfares.
“Blocking major roads to stop traffic flows is nothing short of lawlessness that should not be tolerated,” said Senator Marsha Blackburn.
Alabama Senator Tommy Tuberville has been particularly critical of Democratic leadership in areas where protests have turned violent, specifically calling out California Governor Gavin Newsom and Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass for alleged inaction during recent demonstrations. Senator Bill Cassidy of Louisiana has attempted to frame the legislation as balancing First Amendment rights with public safety concerns, noting that the right to protest does not include the right to prevent others from conducting their daily business or potentially putting lives at risk.
“[D]omestic terrorists assaulted ICE and law enforcement officers, set fire to cop cars and blocked the streets, all while Gavin Newsom and Karen Bass sat on their tails and did nothing,” said Senator Tommy Tuberville.
The Mask Controversy
The proposed legislation dovetails with President Trump’s recent call to ban masked protesters, creating a broader conservative push against tactics perceived as enabling lawlessness. The mask debate has intensified as both protesters and law enforcement have adopted facial coverings for different reasons. Trump has directly addressed the issue, questioning protesters’ motives for concealing their identities during demonstrations against his administration’s immigration policies and other initiatives.
“MASKS WILL NOT BE ALLOWED to be worn at protests. What do these people have to hide, and why?” said President Trump.
ICE acting Director Todd Lyons has defended his agents’ use of masks, citing protection from doxxing and potential threats to their families. This has created tension around what some see as a double standard, with law enforcement permitted to conceal their identities while protesters face potential restrictions. The issue remains unresolved constitutionally, with lower courts delivering mixed decisions on whether mask bans infringe upon First Amendment protections for anonymous speech and association.
“I’m sorry if people are offended by them wearing masks, but I’m not going to let my officers and agents go out there and put their lives on the line and their family on the line because people don’t like what immigration enforcement is,” said ICE acting Director Todd Lyons.
