Gang Antiloitering Laws Are Unconstitutional (From Gangs: Opposing Viewpoints, P 132-139, 1996, David Bender and Bruno Leone, eds. -- See NCJ-159928)

• NCJ Number: 159946
• Author(s): T R Boga
• Date Published: 1996
• Length: 8 pages
• Sale Source: Greenhaven Press
• Publication Type: Legislation/Policy Analysis
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America
• Note: Opposing Viewpoints Series

Annotation

In recent years, local governments have enacted nuisance abatement laws to curb gang activities but these laws are misguided and unconstitutional; while unlawful gang activities should be prosecuted, gang members have the right to peaceful public assembly.

Abstract

In California and other communities, nuisance abatement laws to deal with gangs have been implemented with astonishing speed. Prohibitions on public congregation contained in these laws, however, implicate the First Amendment freedom of peaceful assembly. Whatever the precise boundaries of the assembly right, court cases make it is clear that freedom of assembly may not be curbed on the grounds that some participants have engaged in illegal activities at other times. While gang members do not regularly meet for political purposes, the public congregation provision of nuisance abatement injunctions threatens their exercise of the right to peaceful assembly. Local governments in California and elsewhere are understandably concerned about rising gang violence and drug trafficking, but the nuisance abatement strategy is unconstitutional.