Despite voicing serious concerns, and fully expecting lawsuits, a majority of senators passed legislation that has implications for the constitutional right to assemble.

"If this law had been in effect in 1776, would we still be singing as our national anthem 'God Save the Queen?' " said Sen. Howard Stephenson, R-Draper, who voted against the bill. "Those rebels were considered a gang, and that's my concern. This freedom of assembly seems to be challenged."

Sen. Jon Greiner, R-Ogden, is sponsoring the bill and is also Ogden's police chief.

"You know what I'm talking about," he said. "You've been to the malls. You've been to the parks. You've seen the intimidation practices of this group."

He gave an example of an incident last fall in which loitering laws could not be used to disperse gang members on a street corner in his city. A 15-year-old ended up shooting and killing another gang member, he said.

That argument was enough for Sen. John Valentine, R-Orem, who said he grew up in Los Angeles and spent time in nearby Compton.

"This one is a tough call for me," he said. "I'm going to take a chance on this bill and vote 'aye.' "

He said later that he expects lawsuits and told Greiner the same.

"We call that the Brian Barnard full employment act," said Barnard, a prominent First Amendment attorney.

Loitering laws are already tenuous, he said, and a law like the one proposed in Greiner's bill goes right over the edge.

"This formalizes giving police officers the power to write laws," he said. "It's indicative of the kinds of powers police officers would like to have."

Take for example a gang on the corner talking to LDS missionaries, Barnard said. No officer would break that up. Take out the white shirts and ties, and an officer would more likely break it up even if the group was simply talking.

Those were the same sentiments expressed by objectors on the Senate floor Wednesday.

Sen. Greg Bell, R-Fruit Heights, said crimes are supposed to be about punishing an action, not about punishing who you are or how you think.

"Do we simply say because of your status you can't exercise rights that are otherwise available to other people?" he asked. "I don't know that I'm ready to go there yet."

The bill passed in the Senate's closest vote of the session so far, 16-10. It moves on to the House for debate.

Another related gang bill, Senate Bill 65, was delayed because lawmakers are waiting for information on its fiscal impact. That bill would make it a misdemeanor to solicit a minor to join a gang or prohibit a minor from leaving a gang.