The 50 Dumbest Laws in Rhode Island
Thursday, July 18, 2013
If you’ve ever cussed someone out, carried seaweed off a public beach in Barrington, or cast stones off the Pawtuxet River Bridge, you have unknowingly violated one of the dozens of arcane laws that are still on the books in Rhode Island.
Some laws date back to an era when the lines between private morality and public law were blurred. They include prohibitions against swearing, committing adultery, and drunkenness in taverns. Others, such as rules on riding horses on highways or posting notices of shipwrecks, are simply outdated. Yet others are clear cases of well-intentioned regulation run amok. In all, GoLocalProv has identified at least 50 state laws that seem to serve no valid public purpose.
To see the list of all 50 laws, click here.
Some of the laws date back to the 1600s and simply were never taken off the books—either because someone thought they were valid or simply out of oversight, according to Tom Evans, the state librarian. “They’re just on the books for some reason or the other,” Evans said.
GET THE LATEST BREAKING NEWS HERE -- SIGN UP FOR GOLOCAL FREE DAILY EBLASTOutdated laws are risk for unjust prosecution
While it may seem far-fetched that police would ever enforce some of the laws—such as a law making it a misdemeanor to sell pillows and bedding without the proper tags—civil liberties advocates warn that the existence of such laws creates a real risk of unjust prosecution for an overzealous prosecutor.
“While it is an interesting debate to consider which laws should or should not remain on the books, it can end up being a tragic consequence if Rhode Islanders are prosecuted when they have no knowledge or intent that their actions may have constituted a crime,” said Mike Stenhouse, the CEO of the Rhode Island Center for Freedom and Prosperity, which last spring issued a policy brief urging state lawmakers to take action to protect citizens.
The Freedom Center pointed to a case in Texas in which a Houston resident had a business importing orchids. In 2003, the business owner was prosecuted by federal authorities because the orchids were brought into the country without the proper paperwork. The law landed the orchid enthusiast in prison for 17 months, according to the Freedom Center summary of the case.
“It’s all funny until you’re the one on the other end of the prosecution,” said Giovanni Cicione, an attorney and legal consultant to the Freedom Center.
‘The potential for abuse is still there’
But Rhode Islanders can look closer to home for examples, said Steve Brown, the executive director of the Rhode Island ACLU.
Brown pointed to a recently repealed law making it a misdemeanor to transmit false information. Violators faced fines of $500 and up to a year in prison. The law was enacted in 1989, years before the advent of the Internet. As it was written, someone who lies to their wife about why they were going to miss dinner could be liable for prosecution Brown said. And some people were actually prosecuted under the law until it was repealed last year.
“As long as they’re on the books, the potential for abuse is still there,” Brown said.
The top 50 laws reviewed by GoLocalProv create the potential for some embarrassing situations as well. For example, scheduled fights are banned—presumably targeted at gangs. But no exceptions are written into the law. “Anytime World Wrestling Entertainment comes to town, they could be charged under the law,” Brown said.
Brown said any such law that could be used against people engaged in perfectly innocuous activities should be taken off the books.
“Our Center recommends that the Ocean State follow the lead of about 18 other states that have implemented a default ‘criminal intent’ provision to guard its citizens, and to save the state money, from frivolous legal action,” Stenhouse said. He said described such an approach as a non-partisan, common sense provision that has garnered the support across the political spectrum, from former Attorney General Ed Meese, the ACLU, and civil libertarians like Harvey Silvergate.
During war, unemployment is illegal
Some of the outdated laws raise a slew of constitutional and civil liberties red flags that would seem to justify their outright repeal. One is a law which states that in times of war, the governor can issue a proclamation requiring that every male citizen aged 18 to 50 has to work, to support the war effort. Anyone who can’t find work for 36 hours a week is guilty of a misdemeanor, with a penalty of $100 or three months in prison.
Brown, who reviewed the law, said its opening sentence is blatantly unconstitutional because it addresses only men. “While that may have been OK … when the law was enacted it’s a bit anachronistic in the 21st century,” Brown said.
Of course, it’s hard to imagine any governor issuing such an order today. “It’s hard to believe, but stranger things have happened,” Brown said.
He pointed to another old state law making it illegal to plan anarchy or talk about the overthrow of the government—a clear affront to freedom of speech, according to Brown. But in the heady years after the September 11 terrorist attacks then-Gov. Don Carcieri proposed not only actively enforcing the law but expanding it to apply to alleged terrorists, Brown recalled. The legislature reacted by promptly repealing the whole statute in 2004. (Click here to read the repeal law, which also removed a ban on blasphemy.)
“That’s a modern example of an old law being dusted off and potentially used for questionable purposes and unconstitutional purposes,” Brown said.
How old laws can sometimes useful
But old laws that seem to serve no purpose can become useful, according to Bob Craven, a former state prosecutor and current Democratic state rep from Narragansett.
Craven pointed to an example from his career: the early 1990s, when the state was in the midst of the banking crisis and he was head of the Attorney General’s public corruption unit. Craven was tasked with finding a way of holding two officials from the Rhode Island Share and Deposit Indemnity Corporation accountable for their actions. (They were the president, Peter Nevola, and the former chairman Joseph Bellucci.)
Craven ended up charging them with “misprision of felony”—a charge which had not been prosecuted in nearly one hundred years. In contrast with obstruction of justice, misprision of felony simply means failing to report one or attempting to make sure that authorities don’t find out about it.
“Sometimes these laws are used to justify a prosecution that would not be made unless there was heightened scrutiny against someone who was the target of a police investigation,” Craven said.
Cleaning up the books
Craven said the best solution is to create a commission to pore through all state laws and identify ones in clear need of repeal and ones which may have a potential future use. In fact, such a commission was proposed in the last legislative session, but the measure, sponsored by Rep. John Edwards, D-Tiverton, was tabled in the House Judiciary Committee in May. (Craven who is a member of the committee said he was not given an opportunity to vote on the individual bill.)
In the meantime, Craven said suggested that the public shouldn’t be overly worried about laws against swearing or adultery. Craven, who is himself still a prosecutor for East Providence and Charlestown, said a typical prosecutor will use discretion in deciding what charges to file in any given investigation. (A spokeswoman for the state Attorney General declined comment.)
Even so, he said concerns about unjust prosecution are legitimate. “I don’t think it’s being overstated,” Craven said.
Stephen Beale can be reached at [email protected]. Follow him on Twitter @bealenews
