SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
"This kind of law might seem less shocking in North Korea," said Professor Justin Marceau with the Sturm College of Law at the University of Denver, who represents Western Watersheds Project and National Press Photographers Association. (Photo: USFWS/flickr/cc with overlay)
Groups Challenge Wyoming's 'Downright Un-American' Censorship Laws
State laws place citizen scientists and advocacy groups 'in jeopardy for acting to protect public health, the environment, and animal welfare'
Sep 30, 2015
A coalition of advocacy groups filed suit in Wyoming on Tuesday, charging that the state's recently enacted "data trespass laws" are unconstitutional, undemocratic, and "downright un-American."
"It's clear that Wyoming's agricultural industry looking for a way to silence its critics, and the state legislature went along with the plan."
--Travis Bruner, Western Watersheds Project
The lawsuit (pdf) claims that a pair of Wyoming state laws, enacted this spring, stifle freedom of speech and make citizen science illegal in the state.
The "Data Censorship Statutes," as they are dubbed in the lawsuit, punish individuals who gather information--everything from water quality data to photographs to ground surveys--about land or resources and then communicate, or plan to communicate, that information to government agencies.
As attorney Justin Pidot, who will be representing the groups in court, wrote for Slate earlier this year:
The new law is of breathtaking scope. It makes it a crime to "collect resource data" from any "open land," meaning any land outside of a city or town, whether it's federal, state, or privately owned. The statute defines the word collect as any method to "preserve information in any form," including taking a "photograph" so long as the person gathering that information intends to submit it to a federal or state agency. In other words, if you discover an environmental disaster in Wyoming, even one that poses an imminent threat to public health, you're obliged, according to this law, to keep it to yourself.
"The rules represent a galling assault on our freedom of speech and citizen's rights to protect their health and environment. That's downright un-American," said Michael Wall, senior attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), one of the groups involved in the lawsuit. The other organizations are the Western Watersheds Project, National Press Photographers Association, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), and Center for Food Safety.
"The Wyoming Legislature was not coy about its purposes," the lawsuit states. "The Data Censorship Statutes were enacted after Wyoming livestock interests sued Western Watersheds Project, a plaintiff in this case, for allegedly trespassing while collecting water quality samples. Western Watersheds had collected data that revealed potentially unlawful water pollution and federal grazing permit violations, and had given that data to the government."
The impact of the laws, the suit continues, "is serious," placing advocacy groups and their members "in jeopardy for acting to protect public health, the environment, and animal welfare, as well as for informing public debate and governmental decision-making on issues of considerable public concern." Such issues, the lawsuit contends, include environmental degradation and misconduct, animal cruelty and abuse, and land use and misuse.
"Plaintiffs wish to continue such data collection and public reporting," the lawsuit declares. "The Data Censorship Statutes are designed to deter them from doing so."
Travis Bruner, executive director of Western Watersheds Project, added: "It's clear that Wyoming's agricultural industry [is] looking for a way to silence its critics, and the state legislature went along with the plan. It's a shame that Wyoming's government cares less about upholding the rights of all of its citizens to clean water and clean air and more about the livestock sector's 'right' to secretly pollute and impair our natural resources."
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, The U.S. is on a fast track to authoritarianism like nothing I've ever seen. Meanwhile, corporate news outlets are utterly capitulating to Trump, twisting their coverage to avoid drawing his ire while lining up to stuff cash in his pockets. That's why I believe that Common Dreams is doing the best and most consequential reporting that we've ever done. Our small but mighty team is a progressive reporting powerhouse, covering the news every day that the corporate media never will. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. And to ignite change for the common good. Now here's the key piece that I want all our readers to understand: None of this would be possible without your financial support. That's not just some fundraising cliche. It's the absolute and literal truth. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. Will you donate now to help power the nonprofit, independent reporting of Common Dreams? Thank you for being a vital member of our community. Together, we can keep independent journalism alive when it’s needed most. - Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Deirdre Fulton
Deirdre Fulton is a former Common Dreams senior editor and staff writer. Previously she worked as an editor and writer for the Portland Phoenix and the Boston Phoenix, where she was honored by the New England Press Association and the Association of Alternative Newsweeklies. A Boston University graduate, Deirdre is a co-founder of the Maine-based Lorem Ipsum Theater Collective and the PortFringe theater festival. She writes young adult fiction in her spare time.
A coalition of advocacy groups filed suit in Wyoming on Tuesday, charging that the state's recently enacted "data trespass laws" are unconstitutional, undemocratic, and "downright un-American."
"It's clear that Wyoming's agricultural industry looking for a way to silence its critics, and the state legislature went along with the plan."
--Travis Bruner, Western Watersheds Project
The lawsuit (pdf) claims that a pair of Wyoming state laws, enacted this spring, stifle freedom of speech and make citizen science illegal in the state.
The "Data Censorship Statutes," as they are dubbed in the lawsuit, punish individuals who gather information--everything from water quality data to photographs to ground surveys--about land or resources and then communicate, or plan to communicate, that information to government agencies.
As attorney Justin Pidot, who will be representing the groups in court, wrote for Slate earlier this year:
The new law is of breathtaking scope. It makes it a crime to "collect resource data" from any "open land," meaning any land outside of a city or town, whether it's federal, state, or privately owned. The statute defines the word collect as any method to "preserve information in any form," including taking a "photograph" so long as the person gathering that information intends to submit it to a federal or state agency. In other words, if you discover an environmental disaster in Wyoming, even one that poses an imminent threat to public health, you're obliged, according to this law, to keep it to yourself.
"The rules represent a galling assault on our freedom of speech and citizen's rights to protect their health and environment. That's downright un-American," said Michael Wall, senior attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), one of the groups involved in the lawsuit. The other organizations are the Western Watersheds Project, National Press Photographers Association, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), and Center for Food Safety.
"The Wyoming Legislature was not coy about its purposes," the lawsuit states. "The Data Censorship Statutes were enacted after Wyoming livestock interests sued Western Watersheds Project, a plaintiff in this case, for allegedly trespassing while collecting water quality samples. Western Watersheds had collected data that revealed potentially unlawful water pollution and federal grazing permit violations, and had given that data to the government."
The impact of the laws, the suit continues, "is serious," placing advocacy groups and their members "in jeopardy for acting to protect public health, the environment, and animal welfare, as well as for informing public debate and governmental decision-making on issues of considerable public concern." Such issues, the lawsuit contends, include environmental degradation and misconduct, animal cruelty and abuse, and land use and misuse.
"Plaintiffs wish to continue such data collection and public reporting," the lawsuit declares. "The Data Censorship Statutes are designed to deter them from doing so."
Travis Bruner, executive director of Western Watersheds Project, added: "It's clear that Wyoming's agricultural industry [is] looking for a way to silence its critics, and the state legislature went along with the plan. It's a shame that Wyoming's government cares less about upholding the rights of all of its citizens to clean water and clean air and more about the livestock sector's 'right' to secretly pollute and impair our natural resources."
Deirdre Fulton
Deirdre Fulton is a former Common Dreams senior editor and staff writer. Previously she worked as an editor and writer for the Portland Phoenix and the Boston Phoenix, where she was honored by the New England Press Association and the Association of Alternative Newsweeklies. A Boston University graduate, Deirdre is a co-founder of the Maine-based Lorem Ipsum Theater Collective and the PortFringe theater festival. She writes young adult fiction in her spare time.
A coalition of advocacy groups filed suit in Wyoming on Tuesday, charging that the state's recently enacted "data trespass laws" are unconstitutional, undemocratic, and "downright un-American."
"It's clear that Wyoming's agricultural industry looking for a way to silence its critics, and the state legislature went along with the plan."
--Travis Bruner, Western Watersheds Project
The lawsuit (pdf) claims that a pair of Wyoming state laws, enacted this spring, stifle freedom of speech and make citizen science illegal in the state.
The "Data Censorship Statutes," as they are dubbed in the lawsuit, punish individuals who gather information--everything from water quality data to photographs to ground surveys--about land or resources and then communicate, or plan to communicate, that information to government agencies.
As attorney Justin Pidot, who will be representing the groups in court, wrote for Slate earlier this year:
The new law is of breathtaking scope. It makes it a crime to "collect resource data" from any "open land," meaning any land outside of a city or town, whether it's federal, state, or privately owned. The statute defines the word collect as any method to "preserve information in any form," including taking a "photograph" so long as the person gathering that information intends to submit it to a federal or state agency. In other words, if you discover an environmental disaster in Wyoming, even one that poses an imminent threat to public health, you're obliged, according to this law, to keep it to yourself.
"The rules represent a galling assault on our freedom of speech and citizen's rights to protect their health and environment. That's downright un-American," said Michael Wall, senior attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), one of the groups involved in the lawsuit. The other organizations are the Western Watersheds Project, National Press Photographers Association, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), and Center for Food Safety.
"The Wyoming Legislature was not coy about its purposes," the lawsuit states. "The Data Censorship Statutes were enacted after Wyoming livestock interests sued Western Watersheds Project, a plaintiff in this case, for allegedly trespassing while collecting water quality samples. Western Watersheds had collected data that revealed potentially unlawful water pollution and federal grazing permit violations, and had given that data to the government."
The impact of the laws, the suit continues, "is serious," placing advocacy groups and their members "in jeopardy for acting to protect public health, the environment, and animal welfare, as well as for informing public debate and governmental decision-making on issues of considerable public concern." Such issues, the lawsuit contends, include environmental degradation and misconduct, animal cruelty and abuse, and land use and misuse.
"Plaintiffs wish to continue such data collection and public reporting," the lawsuit declares. "The Data Censorship Statutes are designed to deter them from doing so."
Travis Bruner, executive director of Western Watersheds Project, added: "It's clear that Wyoming's agricultural industry [is] looking for a way to silence its critics, and the state legislature went along with the plan. It's a shame that Wyoming's government cares less about upholding the rights of all of its citizens to clean water and clean air and more about the livestock sector's 'right' to secretly pollute and impair our natural resources."
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.