Committee adopts amendment to battery bill after civil‑liberties groups warn of overbreadth
Loading...
Summary
House Bill 132, which would expand the definition of battery to include the intentional directing of sound at an officer, was amended and reported favorably despite opposition from the ACLU and cultural advocates who warned it could chill parades and lawful expression.
House Bill 132, sponsored by Representative Glorioso, was amended and reported favorably by the House Committee for the Administration of Criminal Justice on April 8, 2026, after a contested hearing that included testimony both supporting law-enforcement protections and warning of unintended consequences for free expression.
Glorioso said she drafted the bill to provide additional protections for law-enforcement officers who face deliberate, close-range noise attacks — for example, bullhorns or other noisemakers placed inches from an officer’s ear — and said the measure is not intended to criminalize concerts or parades. Amendment Set 32‑48 moved language describing the directing of sound out of the police‑officer-specific battery provision and into the general definition of battery; the amendment was adopted.
Civil‑liberties witnesses, including Sarah Whittington of the ACLU of Louisiana, told the committee they were concerned that the bill’s phrasing is vague and could be applied to cultural practices such as brass bands, Mardi Gras parades or lawful protests. “What is the direction of sound but music here?” Whittington asked, warning the measure could chill protected First Amendment activity. Bruce Riley (Voot) and others urged either a decibel threshold or clearer intent language; defense counsel Daniel Gennady flagged the novelty of extending battery law to non‑contact conduct.
Representative Glorioso said she would work with colleagues to tighten intent language and emphasized the bill targets conduct intended to cause harm: “If we need to add more intentional language, I’ll work with madam chair on that,” she said. Committee members acknowledged the concern and debated how to ensure enforcement would not criminalize lawful events.
After debate and the adoption of the amendment, the committee reported HB 132 as amended favorably by voice vote. The committee record includes opposition and support cards from law-enforcement groups, civil-rights organizations and cultural stakeholders.
