Wide open.
And in an interview yesterday afternoon with the ProJo’s Katherine Gregg, the holder of the most powerful office in the state sees no particular reason to change this state of affairs.

I don’t care what state you are talking about, you are always going to have one or two people who are going to do the wrong thing. That’s human life. But the bottom line is: I can tell you that my members who are in the House of Representatives are here for the right reason, and I am just a little cautious to make a regulation for one person.

Of course, with the RI Supreme Court’s ruling, Speaker Murphy, the reverse is now true: it’s not the exception of “one or two people” that we have to wonder about but the entire legislative body, which has now been legally enabled to “do the wrong thing”.
But let’s go with the premise for a moment. If we’re sure that no member of the General Assembly is going to use his or her office to carry out activity that, three days ago, was unethical and/or criminal, why is it necessary to leave this activity decriminalized under law? If no one is going to accept consideration vis a vis their vote on a specific matter in the General Assembly, what is gained by leaving this option available?