Governor Phil Murphy signed legislation on June 2 establishing the offense of “inciting a public brawl,” a move critics warn could criminalize peaceful assembly and exacerbate racial disparities in the nation’s most disproportionately carceral state.
Critics say the new law, which was passed in response to unruly teens holding spontaneous parties that sometimes turned violent, could be used to obliterate freedom of speech by allowing authorities to declare public protests as criminal activity.
The law, A4652/S3507, passed unanimously by the state legislature in March, imposes up to 18 months in prison and $10,000 fines for those deemed to intentionally incite group violence.
The bill’s sponsors, Assemblyman Dan Hutchison and Assemblywoman Carol Murphy, framed it as a targeted response to social media-coordinated youth parties, citing incidents like the 2023 East Brunswick carnival armed robbery and 2024 Gloucester Township Day disturbances that injured police.
“If you incite a public brawl, you will be held accountable,” declared Hutchison, emphasizing law enforcement’s need for tools to prevent chaos without addressing the encroachment on civil rights.
Opponents, however, decry the law’s vague language.
The original bill criminalized organizing groups of four or more whose speech might “offend the sensibilities of a hearer” or cause “public inconvenience or annoyance”—phrases the ACLU of New Jersey called “overbroad” and ripe for suppressing dissent.
Although Murphy conditionally vetoed the bill on May 8 to address some First Amendment concerns, the final version retained provisions that civil rights groups argue still endanger protected speech.
The ACLU-NJ and CAIR-NJ led a coalition of dozens of organizations urging a full veto, arguing the law would disproportionately harm Black and brown communities.
“We are living in a moment in which freedom is under attack by a dangerously tyrannical President Donald Trump,” said progressive Democrat Lisa McCormick. “This bill began as an attempt to deal with unruly teens, but it has ballooned into legislation that could embolden authoritarianism.”
McCormick noted the bill signing came almost five years to the day after a mass of law enforcement, including U.S. Secret Service agents, Park Police and National Guardsmen, stood sentry, many dressed in riot gear, violently dispersed several thousand protesters across from the White House, before President Donald Trump strolled to St. John’s Church for a photo op holding a Bible.
The police fired tear gas canisters and flash-bang grenades to clear out protesters gathered legally at Lafayette Park so Trump could visit the church.
McCormick said the fact that peaceful protesters near the White House were gassed and shot with rubber bullets so Trump could hold his photo op underscores only some of the reasons this law was ill-advised.
“New Jersey already incarcerates black people at 12 times the rate of white residents—the worst disparity in the U.S.—and this new law will widen that gap,” said McCormick. “Police in the US kill more than a thousand people every year, and we have a lawless government that is threatening the lives and freedom of millions more of our citizens. We need a vague law to arbitrarily criminalize ordinary people, like we need another pandemic.”
Police wield enormous power to detain, search, arrest, and use force, but even when the consequences are deadly, officers are often not held accountable for misconduct when they abuse their power.
“Cloaked in the language of public safety, this legislation introduces pathways to criminalize protest and suppress dissent,” warned CAIR-NJ’s Maheen Mumtaz, noting that marginalized communities historically face selective enforcement.
While supporters insist the law exclusively targets violent instigators, critics highlight its punitive scope: participation in a brawl now carries up to six months in jail, and concealing one’s identity during disorderly conduct becomes a standalone offense.
ACLU-NJ Interim Policy Director Jim Sullivan acknowledged the conditional veto created an opportunity for revisions but cautioned that fundamental risks remain: “Amidst unprecedented attacks on the right to protest, we’re calling on lawmakers to protect our most fundamental liberties.”
The law takes immediate effect, placing New Jersey at another crossroads between public safety demands and constitutional freedoms—a tension that will now be tested in its streets and courtrooms.