|
Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act (Introduced in House)
HR 4239 IH
109th CONGRESS
1st Session
H. R. 4239
To provide the Department of Justice the necessary authority to
apprehend, prosecute, and convict individuals committing animal
enterprise terror.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
November 4, 2005
Mr. PETRI (for himself, Mr. ISSA, Mr. MCCOTTER, Mr. CANNON, Mr.
BONILLA, Mr. CUNNINGHAM, Mr. CALVERT, Mr. OTTER, Mr. BOREN, Mrs.
BLACKBURN, Mr. DOOLITTLE, and Mr. SENSENBRENNER) introduced the
following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A BILL
To provide the Department of Justice the necessary authority to
apprehend, prosecute, and convict individuals committing animal
enterprise terror.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the `Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act'.
SEC. 2. INCLUSION OF ECONOMIC DISRUPTION TO ANIMAL ENTERPRISES AND
THREATS OF DEATH AND SERIOUS BODILY INJURY TO ASSOCIATED PERSONS.
(a) In General- Section 43 of title 18, United States Code, is amended
to read as follows:
`Sec. 43. Force, violence, and threats involving animal enterprises
`(a) Offense- Whoever travels in interstate or foreign commerce,
or uses or causes to be used the mail or any facility of interstate
or foreign commerce
`(1) for the purpose of damaging or disrupting an animal enterprise;
and
`(2) in connection with such purpose--
`(A) intentionally damages, disrupts, or causes the loss of any
property (including animals or records) used by the animal enterprise,
or any property of a person or entity having a connection to, relationship
with, or transactions with the animal enterprise;
`(B) intentionally places a person in reasonable fear of the death
of, or serious bodily injury to that person, a member of the immediate
family (as defined in section 115) of that person, or a spouse or
intimate partner of that person by a course of conduct involving
threats, acts of vandalism, property damage, trespass, harassment,
or intimidation; or
`(C) conspires or attempts to do so;
shall be punished as provided for in subsection (b).
`(b) Penalties-
`(1) ECONOMIC DAMAGE- Any person who, in the course of a violation
of subsection (a) causes economic damage not exceeding $10,000 shall
be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 1 year, or
both.
`(2) SIGNIFICANT ECONOMIC DAMAGE OR ECONOMIC DISRUPTION- Any person
who, in the course of a violation of subsection (a), causes economic
damage or economic disruption exceeding $10,000 but not exceeding
$100,000 shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more
than 5 years, or both.
`(3) MAJOR ECONOMIC DAMAGE OR ECONOMIC DISRUPTION- Any person who,
in the course of a violation of subsection (a), causes economic
damage or economic disruption exceeding $100,000 shall be fined
under this title or imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both.
`(4) SIGNIFICANT BODILY INJURY OR THREATS- Any person who, in the
course of a violation of subsection (a), causes significant bodily
injury to another individual or intentionally instills in another
the reasonable fear of death or serious bodily injury shall be fined
under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.
`(5) SERIOUS BODILY INJURY- Any person who, in the course of a violation
of subsection (a), causes serious bodily injury to another individual
shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years,
or both.
`(6) DEATH- Any person who, in the course of a violation of subsection
(a), causes the death of an individual shall be fined under this
title and shall be imprisoned for life or for any term of years.
`(7) CONSPIRACY AND ATTEMPT- Any person who conspires or attempts
to commit an offense under subsection (a) shall be subject to the
same penalties as those prescribed for the substantive offense.
`(c) Restitution- An order of restitution under section 3663 or
3663A of this title with respect to a violation of this section
may also include restitution--
`(1) for the reasonable cost of repeating any experimentation that
was interrupted or invalidated as a result of the offense;
`(2) the loss of food production or farm income reasonably attributable
to the offense; and
`(3) for any other economic damage, including any losses or costs
caused by economic disruption, resulting from the offense.
`(d) Definitions- As used in this section--
`(1) the term `animal enterprise' means--
`(A) a commercial or academic enterprise that uses or sells animals
or animal products for profit, food or fiber production, agriculture,
research, or testing;
`(B) a zoo, aquarium, animal shelter, pet store, breeder, furrier,
circus, or rodeo, or other lawful competitive animal event; or
`(C) any fair or similar event intended to advance agricultural
arts and sciences;
`(2) the term `course of conduct' means a pattern of conduct composed
of 2 or more acts, evidencing a continuity of purpose;
`(3) the term `economic damage' means the replacement costs of lost
or damaged property or records, the costs of repeating an interrupted
or invalidated experiment, or the loss of profits;
`(4) the term `economic disruption'--
`(A) means losses and increased costs that individually or collectively
exceed $10,000, including losses and increased costs resulting from
threats, acts or vandalism, property damage, trespass, harassment
or intimidation taken against a person or entity on account of that
person's or entity's connection to, relationship with, or transactions
with the animal enterprise; and
`(B) does not include any lawful economic disruption that results
from lawful public, governmental, or business reaction to the disclosure
of information about an animal enterprise;
`(5) the term `serious bodily injury' means--
`(A) injury posing a substantial risk of death;
`(B) extreme physical pain;
`(C) protracted and obvious disfigurement; or
`(D) protracted loss or impairment of the function of a bodily member,
organ, or mental faculty; and
`(6) the term `significant bodily injury' means--
`(A) deep cuts and serious burns or abrasions;
`(B) short-term or nonobvious disfigurement;
`(C) fractured or dislocated bones, or torn members of the body;
`(D) significant physical pain;
`(E) illness;
`(F) short-term loss or impairment of the function of a bodily member,
organ, or mental faculty; or
`(G) any other significant injury to the body.
`(e) Non-Preemption- Nothing in this section preempts any State
law.'.
(b) Conforming Amendment- Section 2516(1)(c) of title 18, United
States Code, is amended by inserting `section 43 (force, violence
and threats involving animal enterprises),' before `section 201
(bribery of public officials and witnesses)'.
To anyone working on animal welfare issues in the US, IF YOU EVER
WANT TO PROTEST U.S. ANIMAL WELFARE OR PROTECTION ISSUES IN THE
FUTURE YOU MUST ACT MONDAY TO PROTECT YOUR RIGHTS.
Please see the website < http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:s.03880>
for specifics of the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act. It is possible
the House version is still called HR 4239, which you can find by
searching Google for HR 4239, but the last official updates were
in May. There are several onmibus funding bills that may be voted
on as soon as possible, and a huge backlog the Democrats have vowed
to clear. In the rush it is possible the AETA will not receive adequate
scrutiny by legislators or their staffs. PLEASE call Monday.
Bill Rossiter
CSI
A brief description of the AETA's potential effect
on all of us, adapted from CSI's October "Whales Alive"
newsletter:
The Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act (HR 4239 and
S3880) had been referred to committees as Congress recessed in September.
Keep your eye on it; it may become significant to anyone in the
US wishing to express their opinion publicly on how dolphins and
whales are treated.
The AETA is a significant change to the Animal Enterprise Protection
Act of 1992. Under it Martin Luther King and Gandhi would become
terrorists. Ben White, the revered mentor for whale and dolphin
activists, was a master at powerful, peaceful demonstrations, with
his turtle and dolphin brigades at WTO and other meetings, groups
standing silently during dolphin shows, and so much more. Under
the AETA Ben and his protesters would be terrorists under the law!
AETA terrorism could be anything "involving exclusively a nonviolent
physical obstruction of an animal enterprise or a business having
a connection to, or relationship with, an animal enterprise, that
may result in loss of profits but does not result in bodily injury…."
It could be used against demonstrations, whistle blowers, and undercover
investigations. The extremely vague and broad sweeping language
may put all animal advocates at risk.
Let's go back to the situation in New York on Japan Dolphin Day,
where intense security surrounding President Bush's visit to the
UN froze a record portion of the city, in part to keep his protesters
far away. Within the zone Taffy Williams and others were peacefully
assembled to protest the Japanese dolphin drives and slaughters,
but officially without a permit from the police. If the US bowed
to Japan's complaints and some official was pushed to test the law's
limits is it possible such demonstrations could be declared illegal?
To follow the new AETA after the Congressional recess see: <
www.govtrack.us/>"
_
|
