district court ruled such a law passed by the state of Idaho to be unconstitutional as a violation of the First Amendment Judge B. Īg-gag laws have also drawn criticism on constitutional grounds by eminent legal scholars such as Erwin Chemerinsky, as a violation of the First Amendment for restricting unpopular forms of speech. Statements by Ag Gag bill sponsors imply that 'real' whistleblowers have a safe and effectual means for speaking up, when history shows that's often not the case. Going through 'proper channels' to report abuse often results in supervisors intimidating those employees who have made complaints to keep quiet. When it comes to bringing horrific truths to the public eye, undercover footage and images are often an effective outlet for whistleblowers who otherwise risk retaliation when speaking up.

The whistleblower advocacy project Food Integrity Campaign (FIC), a campaign of the non-profit organization the Government Accountability Project calls undercover video of livestock facilities by whistle blowers essential: It also created a 'terrorist registry' for those convicted under the law. The model law proposed to prohibit 'entering an animal or research facility to take pictures by photograph, video camera, or other means with the intent to commit criminal activities or defame the facility or its owner'. In 2002, the conservative organization American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) drafted the 'Animal and Ecological Terrorism Act', a model law for distribution to lobbyists and state lawmakers. In Kansas, Montana and North Dakota, state legislators made it a crime to take pictures or shoot video in an animal facility without the consent of the facility's owner. constitution.Īg-gag laws emerged in the early 1990s in response to underground activists with the Animal Liberation Front movement. ag-gag laws have been overturned as violations of the First Amendment to the U.S.

The proliferation of ag-gag laws has been criticized by various groups, arguing that the laws are intended primarily to censor animal rights abuses by the agriculture industry from the public, create a chilling effect in reporting these violations, and violate the right to freedom of speech. Supporters of ag-gag laws have argued that they serve to protect the agriculture industry from the negative repercussions of exposés by whistle blowers. Although these laws originated in the United States, they have also begun to appear elsewhere, such as in Australia and Canada. Popularized by Mark Bittman in an April 2011 The New York Times column (but used long before then by advocates), the term ag-gag typically refers to state laws in the United States of America that forbid undercover filming or photography of activity on farms without the consent of their owner-particularly targeting whistleblowers of animal rights abuses at these facilities. Ag-gag laws are anti- whistleblower laws that apply within the agriculture industry.

Gag definition in film