Law‑enforcement witnesses back Montana ‘halo’ buffer law; civil‑liberties group urges caution

A panel of Montana law‑enforcement leaders told the Law and Justice Interim Committee that a narrow “halo” or buffer law could give officers a clear tool to keep crash and investigation scenes safe, but civil‑liberty advocates cautioned the committee about free‑speech and vagueness concerns.

“Twenty‑five feet obviously looks like what most people go with,” said Colonel Kurt Sager of the Montana Highway Patrol, describing common distances used in other states and urging language that also covers amplified devices such as megaphones and air horns.

Helena Police Chief Brett Petty and Montana Police Protective Association director Dan Smith said the goal is preventive spacing that complements, not replaces, existing obstruction statutes. Smith noted there is no draft text yet and urged the committee to consider a verbal‑warning requirement and clear definitions to reduce litigation risk.

Henry Seaton of the ACLU of Montana told the committee that federal case law protects the public’s right to record police and cautioned that improperly drafted halo laws have been struck down in other states. “We feel that further law would be bordering on unnecessary or, if anything, it would hinder and silence the right to free speech,” he said.

Panelists and legislators focused on three recurring questions: how a fixed distance would be enforced, how a buffer law would interact with existing obstruction charges (which are typically applied after interference occurs), and whether a moving buffer that follows an officer causes practical problems. Law‑enforcement witnesses urged precise drafting and training; legislators probed the frequency of problematic incidents and how the law would avoid penalizing well‑intentioned bystanders or journalists.

Public commenters broadly reflected the panel split: Shelby Demars (MPPA) recommended a verbal‑warning trigger and said eight feet is likely insufficient; May Simmons (online) and other residents voiced support for safer scene spacing while asking that journalists retain the ability to record.

Committee members did not vote on statutory language at this meeting. Staff told the committee the topic was placed on the work plan earlier in the interim and the discussion is intended to guide any bill drafting the committee might undertake.