PROVIDENCE — Several Rhode Island state senators have proposed a "Stop Guilt by Accusation Act" to ban the media from "selectively reporting" facts.

The legislation was proposed by Senators Sandra Cano, D-Pawtucket; Elizabeth Crowley, D-Central Falls; Ana Quezada, D-Providence; and Harold Metts, D-Providence.

In their legislation, the lawmakers acknowledge that the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution says the government "shall make no law abridging the freedom of the press."

But they make this argument in their bill:

"The state has a compelling interest to compel the press to promote the objective truth for the sake of the viability of democracy and for the safety, health, and welfare of our communities and in keeping with the spirit of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and to stop the press from serving as a slander machine."

Most basically, the legislation would require the media to report the outcome of court cases. The potential fine for not doing this — or other transgressions: $10,000.

The filing prompted this response from Steven Brown, executive director of the Rhode Island chapter of the ACLU: "Freedom of the press has never been more vital, but this bill is a direct attack on that freedom.

"The only realistic effect of this legislation would be to deeply chill legitimate reporting of the news,’’ Brown said. "Fortunately, the First Amendment prevents the government and litigants from controlling the news as this bill would let them do. These types of efforts to control the press have absolutely no place in a democratic society."

Senate spokesman Greg Pare told The Journal on Thursday:

"Sen. Cano introduced that legislation only because Rep. [Grace] Diaz requested she do so. Her understanding was that Rep. Diaz was putting it in on the House side. However, Rep. Diaz did not introduce the legislation. Sen. Cano plans to withdraw the bill today."

Diaz told The Journal she introduced the legislation at the request of a man named Chris who approached her after a State House hearing, wearing what appeared to be a military uniform.

According to Diaz, Chris told her he had been "accused of something,’’ and then found not guilty.

Diaz said the man told her the media reported the accusations, but not his acquittal, so he was left with a damaged reputation and no recourse. Diaz said the man gave her a copy of the bill, which appears to echo a bill filed in Mississippi.

As for why she decided against introducing the legislation, Diaz told The Journal that an unnamed colleague told her "you are setting yourself up for a headache."

The man who spoke to Diaz was Chris Sevier, an anti-gay and anti-abortion activist who at one point was accused of stalking country music star John Rich.

According to a March 2 story about Sevier on the website Mississippitoday.org:

"He sued Apple for their laptops not blocking porn that he said killed his marriage. He’s drafted anti-LGBT bills that have been pushed by lawmakers in several states. He tried to marry his laptop in three states in apparent protest over same-sex marriage."

In an email on Thursday, Sevier told The Journal: "There can be a lot of malicious prosecution and abuse of process — especially when it comes to members of the minority community.

"For example, we have seen a trend where 19-year-old Latino person or black American has been accused of some really salacious and newsworthy crime, which is reported, but when the accused person is exonerated in some cases the media fails to report on the actual outcome of the case and controversy."

While "I am more of public figure type, I, for example, have been targeted by government actors who intentionally floated false cases against me because they disagree with my religious and political worldviews ... knowing that the media would report on the cases ... [and] do no real investigation or follow up story once the controversies were disposed of."

Sevier, who on Facebook lists his hometown as Atlanta, testified in Rhode Island last May in support of an antiabortion bill sponsored by House Republicans. (He told The Journal he also has "a place in Providence with my girlfriend.")

"My feeling is beyond what I can express,’’ Diaz told The Journal on Thursday, after learning of Sevier’s history. "If I knew, I would run ten-thousand-million miles away from that guy."

She said she sympathized with the issue Sevier raised in their very brief conversation, but regrets not doing more homework on him — and the legislation.

"I didn’t do my research,’’ she said. "This is an experience that will teach me a lot for the future."

Cano issued this statement, defending the bill and then explaining why she is withdrawing it:

"Being charged with a crime is a serious, potentially life-altering matter. When people are accused of a crime they are often thrust into the media spotlight. However, if they are later found to be not guilty of the charges, there is never any follow up clarification.

"This is fundamentally unfair,’’ she said. "This was the reasoning behind a bill that I was asked to introduce to accompany a bill by State Representative Grace Diaz. While I agree with the reasoning, I understand that the language in this proposed legislation goes too far and, therefore, I am withdrawing this bill."

As it stands, the bill spells out the belief that:

"There has been a growing trend for individuals to abuse process and maliciously prosecute someone they disagree with ideologically by filing spurious cases and controversies in various government venues for ulterior motives, knowing that certain segments of the media that align with their ideology would serve as an accomplice by engaging in a form of defamation ... by selectively reporting on the facts of the original case but not on the actual outcome."

This "cultivates an unjust prejudicial conviction in the court of public opinion causing the accused to be shunned, avoided, and marginalized and the media outlet guilty of defamation ... to the point that it unduly decreases the quality of life for the accused."

The legislation continues: "The state has a compelling interest to compel the press to promote the truth because without truth, there is no freedom."

While the Rhode Island Press Association is "pleased that the Senate sponsors [intend to withdraw] their proposed legislation, the fact that this bill — which would be damaging beyond any comprehension — was even introduced is both laughable and frightening,’’ said James Bessette, president of the Rhode Island Press Association.

"It is also very ironic that the bill, which is blatantly unconstitutional, quotes the U.S. Constitution regarding the freedom of the press. We ... wonder what the genesis of this proposed legislation was,’’ added Bessette, special projects editor for the Providence Business News.

With reports from Patrick Anderson

kgregg@providencejournal.com

(401) 277-7078

On Twitter: @kathyprojo