Judge Says Animal Activists Can Secretly Record at Work
A U.S. District Court judge handed a victory late last week to animal-rights advocates by declaring that parts of North Carolinaās Property Protection Act violated the First Amendmentās free-speech provisions.
Legislators passed the act in 2015 as activists were publishing evidence of cruelty at North Carolina animal-agriculture operations. Supporters of the act argued that activists should not be allowed to misrepresent themselves to get hired and sneak cameras into the workplace.
āI donāt think an employee, or somebody doing deceptive things, ought to be able to go and collect evidence of whatever wrongdoing thatās out there,ā said Republican Rep. Chuck McGrady during the debate. āItās personal property, folks. Itās something thatās protected in our constitution.ā
Lawmakers crafted the measure so that it didnāt look like other statesā ag-gag bills. Instead of imposing criminal penalties, the bill allowed employers to sue employees who plant hidden cameras, make secret recordings, capture or remove documents from their workplaces, or interfere with the āpossession of real property.ā And it didnāt single out agriculture.
The judgeās 73-page ruling last week delicately dissected the law. Some provisions, he wrote, violated the First Amendment on their face. Others were unconstitutional when applied to the type of undercover work done by the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) and Animal Legal Defense Fund (ALDF).
Employers could still sue their workers for constitutionally unprotected acts, he wroteāfor example, āopening a gate to let livestock out.ā
Source: Successful Farming

