NEW: Mattiello Disappointed in Raimondo's Veto of "Revenge Porn" Bill, ACLU Applauds Action

GoLocalProv News Team

NEW: Mattiello Disappointed in Raimondo's Veto of "Revenge Porn" Bill, ACLU Applauds Action

Speaker Mattiello said he was "surprised" that Raimondo vetoed the "revenge porn" measure.
Speaker of the House Nicholas Mattiello spoke out Tuesday against Governor Gina Raimondo's veto of a "revenge porn" bill -- while advocates of free speech are applauding the move.  

“I am extremely disappointed that the Governor vetoed an important tool to protect victims of sexual exploitation.  I am surprised because she never raised any concerns during the four months that it was under consideration by the House. We passed this bill, 68 to 1, which would have given victims of sexual exploitation some common sense protections against increasingly shocking violations of their privacy on the Internet," said Mattiello. 

The bill was part of a larger effort to address domestic violence this session. The House passed a state appropriation of $300,000 in the budget creating the first-ever domestic violence prevention fund for the Rhode Island Coalition Against Domestic Violence, as well as legislation introduced by Mattiello to protect victims from being stalked with GPS devices. In addition, the House passed legislation prohibiting utility shutoffs by someone who has been served with a protective order. 

GET THE LATEST BREAKING NEWS HERE -- SIGN UP FOR GOLOCAL FREE DAILY EBLAST

Defending the Veto

The Rhode Island ACLU and a number of groups called the revenge porn bill ""overbroad."

"The groups had requested the Governor to veto the legislation, stating that the bill was so broadly worded that it could make criminals of people involved in neither revenge nor porn, and would have a direct impact on the First Amendment rights of the media. The bill could have limited the distribution of a wide array of mainstream, constitutionally protected material, including items of legitimate news, commentary, and historical interest. For example, use of images of Holocaust victims or prisoners at Abu Ghraib or, to take a more recent example, some of the infamous Anthony Weiner photos, would have likely been prohibited under the terms of this legislation," said the ACLU in a release.

“We commend the Governor for recognizing the serious First Amendment concerns raised by this legislation, and for the need to enact a more carefully-crafted law that will pass constitutional muster. We also wish to thank Rep. Edith Ajello for her efforts in trying to get the bill amended to meet First Amendment standards as it made its way through the General Assembly," said Steve Brown, Executive Director of the ACLU.

"While the bill does include an exemption for items that are “in the public interest,” the groups pointed out in requesting the Governor to veto the legislation that this does not offer news publishers any meaningful protection, as the final determination of whether the material constitutes a matter “in the public interest” would be left to a jury. Editors and producers would have no way of knowing in advance whether an image would be deemed to fall into this category or not, which would create a substantial and unconstitutional chilling effect on speech," said Brown. "Other states in New England that have enacted this type of legislation have passed much narrower versions to mitigate these constitutional concerns."


FY17 House Budget -- Winners and Losers

Enjoy this post? Share it with others.