Policy Impact Analysis - 117/HR/8062

Bill Overview

Title: Protect Our Judiciary Act of 2022

Description: This bill removes the intent requirement for the criminal offense related to picketing or parading in or near a building or residence used by a judge, juror, witness, or court officer.

Sponsors: Rep. Rouzer, David [R-NC-7]

Target Audience

Population: Individuals involved with judicial locations or activities

Estimated Size: 200000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Judge (Washington, D.C.)

Age: 45 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy provides better clarity and security for individuals like myself who have faced intimidation attempts.
  • I believe it may have unintended effects on peaceful protests, but overall, it makes my work environment feel safer.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 7
Year 2 8 7
Year 3 8 7
Year 5 8 6
Year 10 8 6
Year 20 7 5

Activist (New York, NY)

Age: 32 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 15.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This bill might make participating in demonstrations riskier for me and others.
  • I feel that our right to protest is becoming more constrained.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 5 6
Year 2 4 5
Year 3 4 5
Year 5 3 5
Year 10 3 4
Year 20 2 4

Court Reporter (San Francisco, CA)

Age: 50 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy should provide a safer environment for court staff and officials.
  • I don't foresee this affecting my daily work routine much.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 7
Year 2 7 7
Year 3 7 7
Year 5 7 6
Year 10 7 6
Year 20 7 6

Public Defender (Los Angeles, CA)

Age: 28 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy could discourage important public discourse that surrounds our courts.
  • My clients might find themselves facing legal challenges more frequently.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 5 6
Year 2 5 6
Year 3 5 5
Year 5 4 5
Year 10 4 5
Year 20 3 5

Law Student (Atlanta, GA)

Age: 22 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 4.0 years

Commonness: 13/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I'm concerned about how this policy may affect people's willingness to engage in activism.
  • It makes me reevaluate my plans regarding activism near judicial locations.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 8
Year 2 7 8
Year 3 7 8
Year 5 7 8
Year 10 6 7
Year 20 6 6

Homeowner (Chicago, IL)

Age: 37 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 15/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy could reduce disruptive activities in my neighborhood.
  • I'm hopeful it brings more peace and quiet to the area.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 5
Year 2 6 5
Year 3 6 4
Year 5 6 4
Year 10 5 4
Year 20 5 4

Retired Teacher (Houston, TX)

Age: 55 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I understand the need for security around courthouses.
  • This policy might make people think twice about gathering peacefully.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 7
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 7 6
Year 5 6 6
Year 10 6 6
Year 20 6 5

Journalist (Miami, FL)

Age: 46 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 7.0 years

Commonness: 9/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This act raises serious questions about press coverage and public transparency.
  • It could change how protests are covered and perceived by the public.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 7
Year 2 6 7
Year 3 6 6
Year 5 5 6
Year 10 5 5
Year 20 5 5

Paralegal (Denver, CO)

Age: 39 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 11/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I see how this policy aims to protect judicial processes.
  • However, limiting public space for protest could be concerning.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 5 6
Year 3 5 6
Year 5 5 5
Year 10 4 5
Year 20 4 4

Police Officer (Philadelphia, PA)

Age: 30 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy should help enhance security measures effectively.
  • Might face fewer operational challenges during protest events.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 8
Year 2 8 8
Year 3 8 7
Year 5 7 7
Year 10 7 6
Year 20 6 6

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $3000000 (Low: $2200000, High: $3800000)

Year 2: $3100000 (Low: $2300000, High: $3900000)

Year 3: $3200000 (Low: $2400000, High: $4000000)

Year 5: $3300000 (Low: $2500000, High: $4100000)

Year 10: $3500000 (Low: $2700000, High: $4300000)

Year 100: $4500000 (Low: $3700000, High: $5300000)

Key Considerations