Once candidates have Secret Service protection, it's a federal crime to 'impede or disrupt' them

Donald Trump made headlines Monday when he reportedly ordered his Secret Service agents to remove 30 black students from a campaign event. Under federal law, however, he — or any candidate with Secret Service protection — theoretically could have asked the agents to do much more.

That's because H.R. 347, which updated existing protest regulations in 2011, makes it a federal crime punishable by up to 10 years in prison to "impede or disrupt the orderly conduct of government business or official functions" — and that applies to a candidate if they're under Secret Service guard.

The difficulty, as journalist Dahlia Lithwick and First Amendment lawyer Raymond Vasvari argued in 2012, is that "it’s almost impossible to predict what constitutes 'disorderly or disruptive conduct,'" and anything designated a National Special Security Event (NSSE) gets Secret Service protection — including major sporting events, concerts, and more.

Subscribe to The Week

Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.

SUBSCRIBE & SAVE

Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters

From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.

From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.

Sign up

"And that brings us to the real problem with the change to the old protest law," Lithwick and Vasvari concluded. "Instead of turning on a designated place, the protest ban turns on what persons and spaces are deemed to warrant Secret Service protection. It’s a perfect circle: The people who believe they are important enough to warrant protest can now shield themselves from protesters."