How Protests Affect Policy Change: Determinants of Anti-protest Legislation

• In Event: Legislative Behavior across the United States

Abstract

In recent years, 20 states enacted a combined 36 policies that limit how and where protests can take place. This project investigates why some states choose to adopt anti-protest legislation while others do not. I use event history analysis to test the explanations of why states adopt anti-protest legislation, focusing on protest and political characteristics in each state. I find that protest activity in a state discourages anti-protest legislation. Instead, political variables--such as state partisan control--motivate the adoption of anti-protest legislation. I use a multilevel model to test the explanations of why individual state legislators vote in favor of anti-protest legislation. I test how district, legislator, and state characteristics influence individual legislator roll call votes on such legislation. The results of these analyses corroborate the event history analyses results--legislator partisanship explains most legislator voting for or against anti-protest legislation. I conclude that anti-protest legislation is politically motivated rather than necessary to curb rampant protest activity. The implications of these results are that protests are being dissuaded for political reasons, rather than for public safety.

Author

• Justin Keith Crofoot, Pennsylvania State University