NC House Republicans won't sign off on mask ban proposal
A North Carolina bill that would ban the wearing of masks in public for heath reasons has hit a snag in the House of Representatives.
The chamber won't agree to the Senate's proposal, which includes the mask ban, on Wednesday, according to House Speaker Tim Moore's office.
State law currently allows North Carolinians to wear masks in public to preserve their health, thanks to an exemption added during the coronavirus pandemic.
The Senate last week voted to repeal that exception along party lines. Supporters say it's needed to help police more easily arrest protesters who wear masks to hide their identities. Opponents say it could lead to police arresting anyone who wears a face mask anywhere in public.
Both legislative chambers are controlled by Republicans.
After WRAL reported Monday that House Republicans were pushing back, including strong opposition from Rep. Erin Pare, R-Wake, Moore's office confirmed Tuesday that the House wouldn't sign off on the Senate's version of the bill.
Spokespeople for Senate leader Phil Berger didn't respond to a request for comment.
The proposal, House Bill 237, began in the House as a bill to increase the penalties on anyone who commits a crime while wearing a mask. It passed the House with broad, though not unanimous, bipartisan support.
But when it went to the Senate, it was changed to also repeal the public health exception for wearing a mask in public — plus another provision that would ramp up criminal penalties against protesters who block roads, and allow civil lawsuits against people who organize protests that later end up blocking a road.
The American Civil Liberties Union has strongly criticized both those additions, raising concerns about whether they discriminate against people with disabilities and also violate the First Amendment with the anti-protest legal changes.
Senate Democrats also fought against the changes, accusing Republicans of putting people's health and safety in jeopardy in an effort to score political points with anti-mask activists. Senate Republicans shot back, accusing the Democrats of over-exaggerating what the bill would do. Even when it was technically illegal to wear a mask for health reasons before 2020, Sen. Buck Newton said, there's no record of anyone being arrested for it.
But now the divisions are spreading within the GOP, too.
In addition to Pare's opposition the bill's original author Rep. John Torbett, R-Gaston, said he'd work on making sure the bill didn't end up repealing the law allowing masking for public health.
Pare told WRAL in an interview Monday that she and others in the House GOP would press their colleagues not to sign off on the bill without such changes. While she supports the original idea to ramp up penalties against people who commit crimes while wearing a mask, she said, she's concerned that removing the public health exceptions could spread confusion among the public about what's allowed, and lead to people being harassed or arrested.
"If I have a cancer patient who wants to go to the drugstore, and is concerned about picking something up, they have every right in the world to put a mask on," she said. "No one should even question that."
That same sentiment had previously been echoed by a fellow Wake County lawmaker, Democratic Sen. Sydney Batch. A cancer survivor herself, Batch said during the Senate debate that her husband and children wore masks to protect her while her immune system was weakened by her treatments, and that she wouldn't want to make that kind of activity illegal for others in that same situation.
"We talk a lot about freedoms in this chamber," Batch said during that debate. "I hear it all the time. I should have the freedom — my children and my husband should have the freedom — to wear masks in order to protect and save my life, without fear of being arrested and charged."
Batch proposed amending the bill to keep in the anti-protester language the Republicans wanted, but to keep the public health exception for masks on the books. Senate Republicans shot down her amendment with no debate, along party lines.
But with House Republicans now potentially looking at a similar solution, the fate of the bill remains unclear.
