If anything, this is a potential case of "double jeopardy," which would make it a Fifth Amendment issue, not a First Amendment issue.
Of course it isn’t. He is not charging the protestors with additional crimes. He is charging the organization with crimes, with the intent to stifle their right to protest.
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.
Jonathan Turley is a constitutional scholar who is syndicated in newspapers across the country, including conservative outfits such as JWR.
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.
Wrong again.
Pro-Choice at Expense of Free Speech; NOW case against abortion protester may backfire
In 1986, two alleged racketeers were hauled into federal courts in New York and Chicago. One was John Gotti, the head of the murderous Gambino crime family. The other was Joseph Scheidler, a former Benedictine monk and pro-life protester. Only one was found liable as a racketeer: the former monk. Scheidler was found guilty under the civil provisions of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, a law designed to combat organized crime. It is a case that could radically alter the exercise of free speech in this country in a way that the framers could never have anticipated.
If the Attorney General's office were charging the organization with crimes in a matter that involved people demonstrating peacefully (or maybe even not so peacefully) on a public street, you would have a point. Since this matter involves people who committed crimes (they've already admitted this -- there's no question about this fact), I don't see how anyone's "right to protest" is being stifled.
I'm having a hard time understanding your rationale here. Do you really believe that the First Amendment applies in any manner whatsoever to protests that involve criminal acts?