The North Carolina Senate on Wednesday passed a bill along party lines that would ban people from wearing masks in public for health reasons, after an emotional debate over the wisdom of the proposal.
Republican supporters of the ban said it would help police crack down on demonstrators wearing masks. Some lawmakers said there was growing concern that protesters were abusing the pandemic-era norm of wearing masks that conceal their identities.
“It’s time to at least slow the madness, if not literally stop it,” said bill sponsor Rep. Buck Newton (R-Wilson).
The proposal faced strong opposition from Democratic lawmakers, community activists and advocates for people with health problems who were concerned about the proposal’s consequences.
If passed, House Bill 237 would ban everyone, not just protesters, from wearing masks in public for medical reasons. It passed 30-15, with all Republicans in favor and all Democrats against.
“It’s unconscionable,” said Sen. Lisa Grafstein, D-Wake.
On Wednesday, Sen. Danny Britt (R-Robeson) argued that even though the bill would repeal state laws governing mask-wearing, it would still be legal to wear a mask for legitimate health reasons. He said he thinks there are ways to interpret the law. protection.
The Democratic Party was not convinced. One lawmaker suggested there was another motive behind the change.
“Do you really think you’re that threatening to masked chemotherapy patients? Is there something about them that really makes you angry?” asked Sen. Natasha Marcus, D-Mecklenburg. “Or is this more likely a desire to score political points with anti-mask folks at the expense of vulnerable populations in an election year?”
Also passing the Senate on Wednesday were bills that would:
After passing the Senate on Wednesday, each bill must also be approved by the state Assembly before being sent to Democratic Gov. Roy Cooper, who can sign or veto it.
No masks allowed
Democratic lawmakers proposed a variety of ways to amend anti-mask legislation to protect people who want to wear masks due to health concerns. Republicans rejected each of these proposals without explaining their objections.
Sen. Sidney Batch (D-Wake) is a cancer survivor. She talked about how her husband and her children wore masks to protect her while she was undergoing treatment, which made her immune system weak.
“This bill criminalizes their actions and my actions,” she said. “…We talk a lot about freedom in this chamber, and I hear it all the time. I should have the freedom to wear a mask to protect and save my life, and I My children and my husband should also have freedom. Fear of being arrested and prosecuted.”
Bach and Grafstein each proposed a bill that would give police more power to crack down on masked protesters, which Republicans want, while reintroducing legal protections for people who wear masks for public health reasons. proposed to correct it.
Sen. Jay Chaudhry, a third Wake County Democrat, has proposed amendments to the bill that would ban hate groups (mentioning the Ku Klux Klan and Proud Boys in particular) from wearing masks in public. The law currently allows for petitions. His amendment would also require state law enforcement to do more to track hate groups. As with other amendments, Republican lawmakers rejected it without any discussion or explanation.
Republicans ignored Democrats’ concerns, saying they trust police officers not to abuse their powers to arrest people who wear surgical masks in public. Newton said Tuesday that the goal was not to “prosecute the grandma who wore a mask inside Walmart.”
But several Democrats said there was no reason to create the possibility of abuse in the first place. Several people raised concerns that police could use the new mask policy changes to more easily search and detain people as they go about their daily lives.
Newton addressed those concerns Wednesday, saying the public health exemption was only passed during the COVID-19 pandemic, but before that, North Carolina had not technically He said there is no record of anyone being arrested for wearing a mask for health reasons, even though it was illegal.
He added that if he had been a lawmaker in 2020, he would have voted against allowing people to wear masks in the first place on public health grounds.
Juvenile justice will change
The Senate also passed House Bill 198 on Wednesday, which would increase late toll fees, expand tree-trimming authority for sign companies, and other legislative requests from the Department of Transportation, as well as House Bill 591, which would modernize sex crimes. The resolution was approved. This includes using artificial intelligence to create nude images under certain circumstances, banning sex dolls that resemble children, and making it illegal to make “sexual blackmail” threats of publishing someone’s private photos. New things have been added, such as things to do.
Both were passed without debate. The Sexual Offenses Bill received unanimous support, and the transportation changes were also passed almost unanimously. But the other bill that was more controversial was House Bill 834, which would make changes to the Juvenile Justice Act.
Republicans have insisted they have no intention of reversing the state’s landmark 2019 juvenile justice reform called “raise the age,” but critics say the bill would do just that. There are many people.
But in the Senate on Wednesday, nearly every Democrat joined every Republican in voting to approve the changes. It passed with a score of 41 to 4.
Supporters of the juvenile justice system cite research showing it is more effective than the adult prison system at deterring people who have completed their sentences from returning to criminal behavior. Supporters of the bill, led by Britt, argue that adult prisons are often a better way to punish teenage offenders who commit violent crimes.
“This will only help make the process smoother for juveniles involved in violent crimes,” Britt said during Wednesday’s debate, adding that the bill also includes new offenses against adults who entice a minor to commit a crime. He pointed out that it also includes a provision to create a new law.
“This happens primarily because older gang members recruit children to commit violent crimes, knowing that 15-, 16-, 17-, and 14-year-olds are unlikely to face any type of crime. That’s justice.
