California A.B. 1941 Rave parties: permits.

DEFEATED!

As originally written, California AB 1941 would have required promoters seeking permits for "any dance event that may be attended by 1,000 or more persons" prove that they are "sufficiently knowledgeable about illegal drugs and drug paraphernalia" before said permit would be issued.  California AB 1941 was later amended to apply only to "electronic music dance event[s]" with "500 or more" attendees rather than all "all dance event[s]" with "1000 or more."

EM:DEF believes California AB 1941 is unconstitutional because it explicitly applies to only one style of music.  EM:DEF is also concerned that the subjective language used in this legislation will be used to unfairly discriminate against electronic dance music events.  The ACLU of Southern Califonia has expressed similiar concerns. 

EM:DEF's objections to AB 1941

- The term "evidence" is not objectively defined.  What type of "evidence" would be acceptable?  Would a promoter have to pass some sort of written test, or take a class?

- The term "sufficiently knowledgeable" is not an objective standard, therefore how can a promoter PROVE that he or she is "sufficiently knowledgeable"?

- What counts as "drug paraphernalia"?  DEA Administrator Asa Hutchinson testified in front of the Senate Caucus on International Narcotics Control and stated, "Paraphernalia used at rave parties include menthol nasal inhalers, Vicks Vapor Rub, eye drops, surgical masks, and glow sticks; as well as expensively priced water, juice, sports drinks, and soft drinks..." (see http://www.usdoj.gov/dea/pubs/cngrtest/ct120401.html)

- The subjective wording of this bill and the fact that there is no specified formal procedure for the issuance of permits creates a potential for discrimination.  EM:DEF is afraid that electronic music event promoters may be scrutinized more than promoters of other more "mainstream" dance events.

- The subjective wording of this bill and the fact that there is no specified formal procedure for the issuance of permits creates the potential for corruption and/or bribes.

The above objections were originally published on March 22, 2002.

Government Documents associated with AB 1941

Copyright © 2001-2004 Electronic Music Defense and Education Fund - EM:DEF.  All Rights Reserved.
Continued operation of this project made possible by a grant from
the Drug Policy Reform Fund of the Tides Foundation.