Fever dreams and the 1st Amendment. These two Ky. bills are downright un-American.

Say what you will about Sen. Danny Carroll, R-Benton, and many have, but he does not give up.

Despite being roundly savaged in the media last year, he has brought back two pieces of legislation that, to put it simply, are un-American in the ways they affect free speech, government transparency and the right of the people to hold their elected officials accountable.

The first, Senate Bill 44, is a kind of fascinating, 34-page journey through Carroll’s fever dreams, about his fears of being trapped in a “riot” which is to say more than five Black people protesting Breonna Taylor’s death at the hands of Louisville police. I wonder if he would describe Jan. 6 that way? The bill outlaws people setting up camp on government property, where, gasp, they might cook food. Resisting arrest is a Class A misdemeanor “unless committed during the course of a riot, in which case it is a Class D felony.”

Best of all, and by that of course I mean worst of all, a person can be found guilty of disorderly conduct if he or she “accosts, insults, taunts, or challenges a law enforcement officer using abusive, indecent, profane, or vulgar language used as instruments of assault and that serves no legitimate purpose, or by gestures or other physical contact, all of which would have a direct tendency to provoke a violent response from the perspective of a reasonable and prudent law enforcement officer.”

While Fayette County Attorney Larry Roberts would love to see this bill as law thereby having a more legitimate excuse to charge Lexington’s BLM protesters who yelled at police during peaceful protests two years ago, it seems just a little problematic. Before we even get to exactly what the “perspective of a reasonable and prudent law enforcement officer” is, we bang up against a small matter known as the First Amendment, which guarantees us the ability to insult anyone we want, vulgarly or not. Also the right of assembly.

The bill does other terrible things, like limiting when such an offender can get probation. Everyone should read it themselves. Because then and only then you might be prepared for Senate Bill 63.

Senate Bill 63

This is vaguely based on a New Jersey law written after the tragic death of a judge’s son, despite the fact that the shooter found her information on the internet, not from an open records request.

Carroll’s law would shield a large swathe of people from any disclosure by a public agency if they request it. It includes police officers, judges, prosecutors, public defenders, first responders, corrections officers, emergency call center employees, retired police and their relatives. First Amendment attorney Michael Abate reckons it could cover half of Kentucky, if relative was defined broadly enough. As the bill is written, if someone wrote about these people anyway without knowing they were shielded, they could be prosecuted.

“Of course, we have serious First Amendment concerns, but this bill would also massively disrupt business and commerce,” Abate said. “It’s so vague and impossible to administer it could imperil all kinds of basic litigation, mortgages, or property valuation. Ask a banker or your PVA. People should be very concerned.”

Fayette PVA David O’Neill says that some personal information is already protected, but “to open it up to thousands of people would be an administrative challenge.”

In New Jersey, Abate said, some public agencies just stopped responding to any information requests because they were so confused by what was allowed.

If the bill passed, “this would be the first time I’m aware you could sue someone for publishing truthful information,” Abate said.

Last year, Gov. Andy Beshear vetoed another version of the bill in the final days of the session, and there wasn’t enough time for an override. That was a lucky coincidence.

This is scary stuff, and before you dismiss it, listen to the eloquent words of the self-identified conservative editorial board of the Bowling Green Daily News:

“Sadly, the GOP’s recent track record leaves little reason to give the party the benefit of the doubt. A preponderance of the evidence suggests many Republicans have become so intolerant of scrutiny and accountability that they are willing to legislate against transparency and the First Amendment. Considering how often Republicans rant about being mistreated by the “liberal media” or the “fake news,” it’s pretty obvious what they’re really trying to achieve: a codified way to evade watchdogs, both in the press and the general public.

“This stuff has grown far beyond tiresome. And in some cases, it is starkly un-American. Most members of this editorial board lean right politically, but as journalists, we cannot and will not support any assault on transparency and press freedom ... Politicians who lack the maturity or the backbone to deal with criticism or opposing viewpoints should leave public office altogether, instead of trying to rig the game in order to make their jobs more comfortable.”

Sen. Carroll is a retired police officer who runs the Easter Seals of Western Kentucky. He has proposed legislation to protect children. Maybe he thinks these two bills are noble, protective gestures. But instead they will have terrible foreseen consequences. If there are cooler heads in the GOP caucus, then please let them prevail to stop this.