Protect Water Protectors

Fossil fuel advocates ignore First Amendment rights

Evers failed to protect the protectors

Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers turned his back on environmental protectors, including major supporters and Wisconsin’s federally enrolled Native tribes, when he failed to veto Assembly Bill 426 and signed it into law as Act 33.

The bill, co-sponsored by Washington County Rep. Rick Gundrum, expanded the definition of energy provider under state law and made peaceful protest on property owned, leased, or operated by companies engaged in oil, water or gas production or transmission a felony offense, punishable by up to a six-year prison sentence and up to a $10,000 fine.

The bill was modeled after proposals by ALEC, the ultra-conservative American Legislative Exchange Council, and the Council of State Governments in response to the protests at Standing Rock against the Dakota Access Pipeline. Wisconsin became the tenth state to pass similar legislation. Evers’ press release echoed the ALEC and oil and gas industry talking points, indicating the bill was needed to “ensure each energy provider is treated the same under the law while still protecting the right to exercise free speech and the right to assembly.” Evers added that he wanted the Legislature to work with Wisconsin tribal nations in the future “before developing and advancing policies that directly or indirectly affect” them. Given the final language of the new law, neither the tribes nor many of the state’s environmental groups were satisfied.

Maria Haskins, of the tribal advocacy group Menikanaehkem Inc., noted, “neither the energy industry nor the state of Wisconsin has consulted any tribal government about how this legislation would infringe on the sovereignty of Wisconsin’s twelve Indian Nations.”

Thirty-six groups signed letters delivered to the governor urging him to veto the bill. They included the ACLU, Sierra Club, the landowner group 80 Feet is Enough and others. Their concerns included claims that the new law infringes upon constitutional rights to protest and a loss of landowner rights. The letters point to the possibility of more people of color being sent to prison trying to protect our water.

Fourteen more national groups including Greenpeace, the National Lawyers Guild, PEN America, Defending Rights and Dissent anhers also asked Evers to veto the bill. Their letter concluded, “special protections designed to protect the energy industry from protests, including non-violent civil disobedience, do nothing to protect the public or worker safety. They do threaten our democracy by chilling dissent.”

Elizabeth Ward of Sierra Club-Wisconsin called out the governor for failing to protect the environment and make good on his campaign promise to address climate change. “Governor Evers had the opportunity to demonstrate leadership on climate change, and he opted not to. The need to stand up for water protectors, Tribal members, and landowners with oil pipelines running through their property has been crystal clear with the recent pipeline fights in Wisconsin and around the country. It’s disappointing that the governor was unwilling to do so and instead supported this bill that helps the fossil fuel industry continue to lock us into a climate catastrophe,” she noted.

Chris Ott, the executive director of the ACLU of Wisconsin, vowed to monitor the enforcement of this law and “oppose any attempts to infringe on the freedom of speech or criminalize people for making their voices heard.”

Unfortunately, Governor Evers sent a conflicting message by signing this bill into law. He previously appointed a task force to focus on actions to combat climate change led by Lt. Gov. Mandela Barnes. In doing so, Evers signaled his support of efforts to rein in the destructive impact the use of fossil fuels has on our environment. His failure to veto this “pipeline protection” bill undercuts his own task force and calls into question Evers’ commitment to protecting our environment.