If criminal trespass is protected as "free speech" in this country, then I expect the Bergen Record to provide moral and financial support to the person who burns their office to the ground to protest their idiotic articles.
Can you even read?
They plead guilty to misdemeanor trespass charges and were released (I assume they paid a fine).
Fifteen months later, Ashcroft bought “sailor mongering” charges against their organization. If you can think of some reason that isn’t political for his actions, please share.
And they didn’t burn anything down, so I have no idea why you brought that up.
Yes, I can. The author of this article described the charges against these people as an "unprecedented attack on the First Amendment." Whether or not they should be charged with the additional crime is something we can all argue about. However, there is no way in hell that a situation in which the defendents have pleaded guilty to a crime can possibly be construed as a First Amendment issue.
If anything, this is a potential case of "double jeopardy," which would make it a Fifth Amendment issue, not a First Amendment issue. But then I guess that is why the author of this article is a third-rate writer for a second-rate newspaper, and not a leading constitutional scholar.
It should also be noted that this same "double jeopardy" argument would apply in "hate crimes" cases, pro-life protesters, etc. But I am quite certain that this guy has no problem when Federal prosecutors abuse their power in cases like that.
I agree that the case against the Greenpeace people has no standing is probably unconstitutional. However, I also believe that this case should be pursued with all of the AG's resources. The problem with illicit conduct on the part of one or more branches of the Federal government is that it never gets corrected until a left-wing person or organization is the target.