Law targets rioters in Michigan

A law that took effect June 1 aims to extinguish riots by barring revelers from public universities in Michigan.
Any person found guilty of a felony charge related to a college riot could be prevented from stepping foot on public university campuses for up to two years, while a misdemeanor charge could result in a one-year ban.
Legislators created the law after close to 10,000 people took to the streets at Michigan State University March 27-28, 1999. The revolt came after the school's loss in the NCAA men's basketball semifinals. At least 132 people, including 71 MSU students, were later charged with riot-related offenses.
Bill Sullivan, chief of staff for the bill's sponsor, Sen. Loren Bennett, R-Canton, said the penalties for any felony or misdemeanor crimes connected to a riot would be enforced under current state law.
"This law doesn't create new crimes, it just serves as a punishment."
Judges, not university officials, would also determine if and for how long a person would be banned. The law addresses any riot-related crimes which happened on a campus or within 1,000 feet of a campus.
Sullivan said the new law distinguishes riots from peaceful protests by only punishing participants of violent activity. Inciting a riot, unlawful assembly and civil disorder are all defined in law as violent activity, he said.
"One example relates to civil disorder. It means any public use of a firearm or inciterary device that would result in damage to a person or property. So there's no way it could be construed as a peaceful protest."
While property damage estimates from the MSU violence amounted to $360,000 and police costs totaled $130,000, Sullivan said lawmakers created the bill because each university does not have jurisdiction over students from other schools and thus cannot punish them.
"A big part of the problem we found out from the MSU riot was that a large population of people from other schools were involved. There were students from CMU and Western and other schools."
Dean of Students Bruce Roscoe said he had heard that one CMU student was involved in the MSU riot, but the student was never tried or prosecuted in court. Roscoe said he's not surprised that legislators passed the riot law because it's consistent with recent legislation regarding college-student behavior.
The federal government, for example, recently gave schools the authority to notify parents if students broke the law by using alcohol and other drugs, he said.
"I think all of the messages that we've seen regarding the behavior we expect from our students are worthwhile. I don't know if the law in itself will change behavior, but I think the attitude of the law is consistent in the message, which is that we still expect students to be responsible members of our universities."
Sullivan said half of the rioters at MSU were college students while half were not, and the law pertains to non-students as well.
"It prohibits them from going to school, if they plan on going to a state university," he said. "And if they have tickets and plan to go to a football game on campus, they wouldn't be able to go."
"That's pretty severe," Roscoe said of the bans. "I would hope students would be aware of it."
The CMU community, however, has not had to worry about riotous behavior in more than 10 years, he said, when "end of the world" parties used to occur near campus. Roscoe said CMU students today know what is expected of them and act more responsibly overall.
The riot law should not threaten peaceful forms of protest, he said.
"People know how to express one's freedom of speech. I don't think this law is an attempt to stifle free speech, but to punish the great number of alcohol infractions that go along with riots."
CMU Police Capt. Ron Williams also said the law may help dismay students from participating in any violent outbreaks.
In the past at CMU, "There certainly was riotous behavior, no question about that," he said. "Some of those situations could be considered riots and that law very well could have helped."
Blaine Stevenson, sociology, anthropology and social work associate professor, said the law could endanger non-violent dissent and acts of disobedience against social injustices.
"There were things like this law that were used to stop the civil rights movement. They failed but caused a lot of hardship."
Stevenson said acts of dissent like the World Trade Organization protests in Seattle in December, the anti-World Bank demonstrations in Washington, D.C. in April and the Organization of American States demonstrations in Windsor, Ontario held earlier this month are recent examples of civil disobedience that could be threatened by the riot law.
"Those demonstrations were viciously attacked, and for the most part those demonstrations were nonviolent, in theory and in practice. It would be a real blow to democracy to stifle those protests with that kind of law, which attacks people, especially young people, who are expressing concerns about the environment, low wages, human-rights abuses and lots of other issues. I'm really skeptical about legislation like that."
Stevenson said he was recently prevented from going to the University of Windsor to videotape panel discussions held there concerning the OAS, an international economic institution representing 35 nations in the Western Hemisphere. The OAS supports removing almost all restrictions on trade throughout North and South America.
"I was stopped at the border. There were dozens of police there and they stopped me and prevented me from going. They said I was carrying too much water.
"Authorities can use laws in different ways, and not in always democratic ways. Some laws could be threats to democracy"