[Ppnews] Supreme Court Will Not Hear SHAC 7 Case

[Political Prisoner News]

Supreme Court Will Not Hear SHAC 7 Case

by Will Potter on March 7, 2011
http://www.greenisthenewred.com/blog/shac-7-supreme-court/4447/?utm_source=GreenIsTheNewRed+Newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=03596d4077-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2

in <http://www.greenisthenewred.com/blog/category/legal/>Terrorism Court Cases

The Supreme Court announced today that it will 
not review the case of the SHAC 7, a landmark 
First Amendment case in which a group of animal 
rights activists were convicted as “terrorists” 
for running a controversial website.

The campaign of the 
<http://www.greenisthenewred.com/blog/tag/shac-7/>SHAC 
7 didn’t involve anthrax, pipe bombs, or a plot 
to hijack an airplane. They ran a website. On 
that website, they posted news about the campaign 
­ legal actions like protests and illegal actions 
like stealing animals from labs ­ and unabashedly supported all of it.

For this they faced a slew of conspiracy charges, 
including conspiracy to violate the 
<http://www.greenisthenewred.com/blog/tag/animal-enterprise-protection-act>Animal 
Enterprise Protection Act and commit “animal enterprise terrorism.”

The defendants lost at the trial level, and were 
sentenced to between one and six years in prison. 
Upon appeal, 
<http://www.greenisthenewred.com/blog/shac-7-conviction-upheld-on-appeal/2307/>the 
Third Circuit issued a sweeping ruling. It held 
that SHAC’s fiery rhetoric constituted a “true 
threat” (even though they were never accused of 
destroying property, or violence, or inciting 
such activity) because illegal conduct has taken place in the same campaign.

To put it another way, the court held that the 
First Amendment rights of a group of people could 
be restricted based on the past actions of others.

For instance, one of the defendants, Josh Harper, 
gave two speeches in which he talked about the 
campaign, and also his personal, theoretical 
support for the Animal Liberation Front and 
“black faxing.” The appellate court noted:

Harper’s personal conduct does not cross the line 
of illegality; to punish him simply on the basis 
of his political speeches would run afoul of the 
constitution. However, his conduct
 does provide 
circumstantial evidence from which a jury could 
have reasonably inferred that Harper was involved 
in a conspiracy to violate the AEPA.

The Supreme Court has denied writ of certiorari 
in the case, which means the case will not be 
heard. In short, the appeals court ruling stands, 
and this is the end of the line for the SHAC 7.

The chances of a case being heard by the Supreme 
Court are incredibly slim, of course. But I’m a 
bit surprised the court will not hear the SHAC 7 
case. The Supreme Court recently 
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/03/03/AR2011030304124.html>ruled 
that Westboro Baptist Church (the “God Hates 
Fags” folks) have the right to protest military 
funerals. Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. wrote 
that their conduct “is certainly hurtful and its 
contribution to public discourse may be 
negligible,” but it is protected, nonetheless.

All but one of the SHAC 7 defendants have been 
released from prison, so this ruling was not 
about prison time. It was about the precedent 
that this type of ruling may set, particularly in 
the context of the 
<http://www.greenisthenewred.com/blog/shac-7-supreme-court/tag/animal-enterprise-terrorism-act>Animal 
Enterprise Terrorism Act. And it was about 
whether that label, “terrorist,” should follow 
these activists for the rest of their lives.

Even if you do not agree with the SHAC campaign, 
or animal rights campaigns in general, the 
Supreme Court’s refusal to hear this case has 
chilling implications for all activists of all social justice movements.

UPDATE: Here’s a response from Lauren Gazzola, one of the SHAC 7:

“Today has been a hard day, because I think that 
the Supreme Court’s denial of our cert. petition 
was wrong. Not just legally wrong, but morally 
wrong. In that sense, I’ve had many hard days 
over the past several years. Right now though, 
I’d like to tell you about one of the easiest.

A few weeks ago I gave a talk about the SHAC 7 
case to a law school class. Before I got up to 
speak, the professor showed undercover footage 
from inside of HLS. It was the first time I’d 
seen it since getting out of prison and I broke 
down. When it ended, the Executive Director of 
the National Antivivisection Society got up to 
introduce me. “It’s hard to know where to start,” she began.

I was next up and still slightly shaky from 
having seen the footage. I had planned to begin 
by thanking the professor for inviting me,
thanking NAVS for sponsoring the event, and 
thanking the students for attending. Instead I 
told the class, “I know exactly where to start.

I spent three-and-a-half years of my life trying 
to put HLS out of business and three-and-a-half 
years in prison for it. Every single day was 
worth it and I’d do it again.” Today, I’d simply 
like to repeat this: I’d do it again. It was all worth it.”

Tagged as: 
<http://www.greenisthenewred.com/blog/tag/animal-enterprise-protection-act/>Animal 
Enterprise Protection Act, 
<http://www.greenisthenewred.com/blog/tag/animal-enterprise-terrorism-act/>Animal 
Enterprise Terrorism Act (AETA), 
<http://www.greenisthenewred.com/blog/tag/josh-harper/>Josh 
Harper, 
<http://www.greenisthenewred.com/blog/tag/shac-7/>SHAC 
7 - Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty Activists Convicted of Terrorism




Freedom Archives
522 Valencia Street
San Francisco, CA 94110

415 863-9977

www.Freedomarchives.org  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://freedomarchives.org/pipermail/ppnews_freedomarchives.org/attachments/20110308/a58ac88e/attachment.htm>