Sb 77 - Protection for Monuments

• Jurisdiction: Georgia,United States
• Citation: Vol. 36 No. 1
• Publication year: 2019
• topic: Civil Rights,Constitutional Law,Criminal Law,Public Sector Law

SB 77 - Protection for Monuments

Evelyn Graham

Georgia State University College of Law, egraham6@student.gsu.edu

Timothy J. Graves

Georgia State University College of Law, kgraves11@student.gsu.edu

[Page 219]

STATE GOVERNMENT

State Flag, Seal, and Other Symbols: Amend Section 1 of Chapter 3 of Title 50 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated, Relating to State Flag, Seal, and Other Symbols, so as to Provide Additional Protections for Government Statues, Monuments, Plaques, Banners, and Other Commemorative Symbols; Provide Definitions; Provide for Related Matters; Provide an Effective Date; Repeal Conflicting Laws; and for Other Purposes

Code Sections: O.C.G.A. § 50-3-1 (amended)

Bill Number: SB 77

Act Number: 57

Georgia Laws: 2019 Ga. Laws 57

Summary: The Act prohibits persons and entities from destroying, concealing, or relocating any publicly or privately owned monument. Monuments may only be relocated when necessary for construction, expansion, or alteration to a site of equal prominence within the same municipality. Violators of this legislation are subject to treble the amount of the cost to repair or replace such monument, exemplary damages, attorney's fees, court costs, and being charged with a misdemeanor.

Effective Date: April 26, 2019

History

"Several recent years ago," a cemetery in Chickamauga, Georgia was vandalized.¹ Several monuments and gravestones were

[Page 220]

destroyed, much to the chagrin of Chickamauga residents.² Chickamauga native, Senator Jeff Mullis (R-53rd), after hearing about the incident from his city manager, made it his mission to spearhead a movement dedicated to resolving these types of incidents.³ His opposition to the event came in the form of Senate Bill (SB) 77.⁴

SB 77 prevented the removal, concealment, and destruction of monuments.⁵ Before this bill's introduction, Georgia law protected all military monuments and memorials from being removed, desecrated, or destroyed.⁶ Senator Mullis, however, wanted to expand upon this law by amending Code section 50-3-1 to include all monuments, public and private.⁷ At the time of the Chickamauga cemetery's destruction—and until the enactment of SB 77—Georgia's statute limited protected monuments to the following:

[A]ny publicly owned monument, plaque, marker, or memorial which is dedicated to, honors, or recounts the military service of any past or present military personnel of this state, the United States of America or the several states thereof, or the Confederate States of America or the several states thereof.⁸

Essentially, the purpose of SB 77 was to broaden this statute and create a harsher punishment to deter the destruction of monuments.⁹

Proponents of this bill insisted that its essential purpose was to preserve history, "good, bad[,] or indifferen[t ]."¹⁰ They contended the bill was needed to protect all monuments, despite their offensiveness and the "terrible" historic notions associated with them, because history ought to be preserved at all costs—not

[Page 221]

concealed, removed, or destroyed.¹¹ Opponents of the bill reject the assertion that the bill is not centered on protecting Confederate monuments in particular.¹² They contend that SB 77 was a direct attempt to stunt House Bill 426, Georgia's first hate crime bill, and a response to 2018 Georgia gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams's initiative to remove the Confederate monuments.¹³ Additionally, opponents believed the legislation was introduced to pander to citizens who will keep SB 77 supporters in office.¹⁴ The proponents' direct response to those who say the bill perpetuates hate is that the bill is supposed to be about "inclusion, diversity, [and] tolerance."¹⁵ Bill supporters consider destroying a monument a "hate crime in itself," reasoning the destruction is an obstruction of First Amendment rights and "leads . . . to more crimes."¹⁶ Opponents would seemingly find this response laughable because they feel the legislation's true intent is to intimidate people.¹⁷

Proponents of SB 77 also insisted that the preservation of monuments is important because they account for some of the economic gain in Georgia.¹⁸ Representative Alan Powell (R-32nd) asserted that 13 million Georgia tourists specifically visit to enjoy the monuments and memorials, thereby boosting the state's economy—especially in Savannah, Georgia.¹⁹ He thereafter established that there were no studies or comparative analyses confirming the monuments contributed to any economic impact in Georgia.²⁰

In March 2019, members and supporters of Beacon Hill Black Alliance for Human Rights gathered in downtown Decatur and at Decatur High School to discuss SB 77.²¹ Their main purpose and

[Page 222]

goal was to pressure legislators to vote against SB 77 and inform SB 77 advocates that their views on the Confederacy and the Confederate monuments were offensive.²² Additionally, high school students wanted to express their displeasure of having to soon pay taxes to maintain monuments that depict hate and hate crimes against their ancestors.²³ The group met at the Capitol and discussed the bill with Representatives Erica Thomas (D-39th) and Renitta Shannon (D-84th), two members of the Democratic Caucus and opponents of SB 77.²⁴ However, their efforts were unsuccessful.²⁵ Bills like SB 77 have been introduced before and are considered "redundant" in the General Assembly.²⁶ SB 77 has proven itself, unlike the others, not to be a failure.

Bill Tracking of SB 77

Consideration and Passage by the Senate

SB 77 was introduced by Senators Jeff Mullis (R-53rd), Steve Gooch (R-51st), Butch Miller (R-49th), Mike Dugan (R-30th), and Burt Jones (R-25th).²⁷ The Senate read the bill for the first time on February 8, 2019, and committed the bill to the Government Oversight Committee.²⁸ The Government Oversight Committee's substitute included the majority of the introduced bill's text, merely changing the text of a few subsections.²⁹ The Government Oversight Committee favorably reported the bill by substitute on March 1, 2019.³⁰ On March 4, 2019, the Senate read the bill for the second time.³¹ The Senate read the bill for a third time on March 5, 2019,

[Page 223]

and it adopted and passed the committee substitute by a vote of 34 to 17.³²

Consideration and Passage by the House

Representative Powell sponsored SB 77 in the House.³³ The House read the bill for the first time on March 7, 2019, and committed it to the Governmental Affairs Committee.³⁴ The House read the bill for the second time on March 8, 2019.³⁵ The Committee added "civil rights" monuments to the bill in an effort to make the bill all-inclusive.³⁶ On March 14, 2019, the Governmental Affairs Committee favorably reported the bill by substitute.³⁷ On March 28, 2019, the House read the bill for a third time, and it adopted and passed the substitute by a vote of 100 to 71.³⁸ The Senate agreed to the House's version of the bill, as amended, on March 29, 2019, by a vote of 33 to 17.³⁹ The Senate sent the bill to Governor Brian Kemp (R) on April 9, 2019.⁴⁰ The Governor signed the bill into law on April 26, 2019, and the bill became effective on April 26, 2019.⁴¹

The Act

The Act amends Title 50 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated to provide additional protection for monuments.⁴² Section 1 of the Act amends subsection (b) of Code section 50-3-1.⁴³ Section

[Page 224]

2 states that the Act becomes effective immediately.⁴⁴ Section 3 repeals all prior law found to be in conflict with the Act.⁴⁵

Paragraph (b)(1) provides a separate section defining the terms "agency," "monument," and "officer" as used in subsection (b).⁴⁶ Agency is notably broad in scope, going so far as to specifically include local boards of education and the University System of Georgia.⁴⁷ Monument is also broadly defined to include plaques, markers...