In the late 2010s, with growing concerns over activities of the far right, white nationalists, and white supremacists, the Anti-Riot Act had been used to prosecute organizers of various rallies that had turned violent, such as the Unite the Right rally in 2017.
However, in June 2019, a federal district court in California, overseeing the case of members of the Rise Above Movement related to both the Unite the Right rally and other protests in California, ruled that the Anti-Riot Act was unconstitutional in that it was "overbroad in violation of the First Amendment."[72]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_1968#Title_X—Civil_Obedience
https://www.latimes.com/socal/daily-pilot/news/tn-dpt-me-hb-ram-charges-dropped-20190604-story.html
A U.S. District Court judge ruled to dismiss federal charges against three reputed members of a Huntington Beach-based white supremacist group who were accused of traveling to political rallies, in some cases out of state, to incite brawls with protesters.
Judge Cormac Carney granted a defense motion Monday to dismiss the two-count indictment, concluding that the federal Anti-Riot Act is “unconstitutionally overbroad in violation of the First Amendment.”
The three defendants are Robert Rundo, 29, of Huntington Beach — who authorities say is a founding member of the Rise Above Movement — Robert Boman, 25, of Torrance and Aaron Eason, 39, of Anza in Riverside County. A grand jury indicted them Nov. 1 on one count each of conspiracy to commit rioting and one count of use of interstate commerce with intent to riot.
“We are disappointed with the court’s ruling and we are reviewing the possibility of an appeal,” U.S. attorney’s office spokesman Ciaran McEvoy said Tuesday.
Attorneys for Rundo did not respond to a request for comment.
A fourth defendant, Tyler Laube, 22, of Redondo Beach, pleaded guilty Nov. 20 to one count of conspiracy to violate the Anti-Riot Act.
On Tuesday, his attorney, Jerome Haig, filed a notice of a motion to withdraw Laube’s guilty plea. If it is granted, he will motion to dismiss the charges against his client, Haig said. Those motions would be heard by Carney.
“I can’t imagine the judge won’t grant it,” Haig said. “He wouldn’t sentence a defendant on a statue that he has found as unconstitutional.”
Two other members of RAM pleaded guilty to federal charges last month.
In his ruling Monday, Carney said the Anti-Riot Act doesn’t just criminalize violent acts or acts committed during a riot situation. “No violence even need to occur,” he wrote.
“A defendant could be convicted for … posting about a political rally on Facebook or texting friends about when to meet up,” the judge stated.
“One person’s protest might be another person’s riot,” he wrote. “It is easy to champion free speech when it advocates a viewpoint with which we agree. It is much harder when the speech promotes ideas that we find abhorrent.”
Carney noted that prosecutions under the 1968 riot statute — enacted at the height of demonstrations addressing civil rights and the Vietnam War — have been rare and that the law’s constitutionality hasn’t been widely evaluated.
Know what seems really bothersome here?
That this Title X anti-riot act's dismissal arguments could be used as a motion for all the holdouts charged and indicted and still awaiting trial or going through trials. I don't know if they're all being tried and are waiting to take up this argument on appeals, or what.
79 out of 177 convicted have been sentenced. None of those sentences have been overturned. None of the convictions have been overturned, but it appears to me that they could be if enough of those left to be sentenced -- 98 to-date -- could win their cases based on this argument, and thus overturn the sentences of the 79. I find it hard to believe that people would still plead not guilty when there's ample evidence brought forward, but among the 700+ who were arrested, they might very well be, evidence or no evidence, using these arguments.
Bannon said that Trump’s rally would force Arizona to decertify the state’s election and it would hand Trump the state electoral vote! Arizona says NOPE NOT GOING TO HAPPEN,
= new reply since forum marked as read
