The Cheat Sheet does not take any position on foreign policy and generally limits its content to local government related news and information. On controversial issues like this, we will try our best to highlight different perspectives, while still doing our best to confirm any facts in contention. We leave it to the reader to form an opinion.
Last semester there were continued protests relating to the current conflict in Gaza and other ongoing concerns about the Palestinian people and policies of Israel. These protests eventually included an encampment as part of the protest tactics. There seems to be little dispute that civil disobedience was involved, both of university policy, rules, and even minor legal infractions. The more controversial issue is the use of a Class 4 felony "mob action" prosecution against several protesters. This is as opposed to the typical misdemeanor trespass or resisting arrest charges more common to civil disobedience incidents.
One can compare and contrast the civil disobedience involved in such tactics with the divestment protests regarding South African apartheid in the mid 1980s, which included occupying University buildings, trespass during University Trustee meetings, and a "shantytown" on the quad that the University demanded to be removed as well.
The Learning & Labor podcast has a well cited overview of those protests and arrests, but takes its own position on the comparison. For obvious reasons, many find any comparison of Israel's policies to South African apartheid to be inherently erroneous and offensive, even if the two respective divestment campus protests themselves may have some parallels.
Overview:
Illinois Public Media had an article back in July when news of these belated summer charges, built off of surveillance and social media video, started to drop:
In a statement to IPM, University of Illinois spokesperson Robin Kaler said, “Free speech and free expression are bedrock principles and a cornerstone of academic inquiry at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign.”
However, Kaler said that when students choose to move from speech to civil disobedience, they must be prepared for the consequences.
The News-Gazette reports investigators used videos and social media to link Issa to an afternoon demonstration on Friday, April 26.
During the protest, students locked arms around their encampment near the U of I Alma Mater to prevent police from tearing their tents down. Administrators warned students the tents were against school policy before sending in campus police. Police were not able to clear a path to the tents. Students took them down themselves later in the evening and rebuilt them on the Quad later that weekend.
More at that full article here. WCIA had similar coverage at the time here. At the time the ACLU of Illinois noted its previous concerns about the "mob action" statute and it being used as anti-protest tool:
We are aware of students from the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign along with community members being charged in state court with felonies related to their actions around encampments at the U of I campus at the end of the last school year. The charges are brought under a “mob action” law that the ACLU of Illinois opposed when it was first considered in the Illinois General Assembly. We expressed concern at the time that the felony penalties available to prosecutors under this statute would be used against those engaged in protest. Despite repeated declarations by lawmakers that this was not the purpose, we see this charge now being used in this way.
A felony conviction carries serious, lifelong consequences and prosecutors should pursue felony charges only where necessary.
In response to the student encampments on campuses across Illinois, the ACLU of Illinois has consistently urged restraint – from students and administrators. We urge prosecutors to exercise that same restraint in charging any violations emanating from the protests.
That statement is available here.
Niko-Johnson Fuller, of the Learning & Labor podcast noted above, had noted some of the similarities between the recent encampment tactics of campus protesters and the anti-apartheid encampment tactics on campus in the past. From his article in Smile Politely:
One significant escalation the [Divest Now Coalition] took was the construction of a shantytown on the Main Quad in April 1986, which pro-Palestine organizers today have compared to the recent encampment in a similar location. This action served multiple purposes, providing symbolism of the poor living conditions of the Black majority in South Africa, creating a sense of community among protestors, and forcing the administration to respond to their demands for divestment.
That full article here, with a much broader overview of the protests here against apartheid as well as for the University to divest from that regime and the economy that maintained it.
The News-Gazette also highlighted the use of surveillance and social media footage towards building the case against protesters in addition to the two arrested at the time of the protests themselves.
Latest Update on Prosecutions:
From the News-Gazette last week:
Seven people stand charged with alleged criminal offenses tied to the pro-Palestinian demonstrations in April on the University of Illinois campus...
Arthur P. Paganini, 23, of Urbana, and Victor H. Smith, 20, of Champaign, were each charged this month with one count of mob action.
That’s a Class 4 felony defined as having used force or violence alongside others to disturb public peace.
The two were also charged with obstructing a peace officer, a misdemeanor.
Their charges arrive on top of five other individuals charged with mob action in connection with the April 26 protests.
That full article here. Those prosecutions include a former Unit 4 school board member and local activist, Elizabeth Sotiropoulos. Court documents state that the felony "mob action" charge is based on her "linking arms" and defining that as the coordinated "force and violence" of the statute.
The State's Attorney doubled and then tripled-down on defining "linking arms" as being "force and violence" in her public statements in a WDWS radio interview on the Penny for Your Thoughts show. For many local activists, it is difficult to rectify this legal interpretation in plain language. Some of the most iconic images of the non-violent actions by the Civil Rights Movement involved the coordinated linking of arms by two or more people. The linking of arms was often, in itself, a symbol of non-violent resistance. Example image from 3/17/1963 during the Selma to Montgomery March protests:
In the same interview, the State's Attorney also appeared to suggest that lesser charges or sentencing may be more appropriate for some of the defendants. This seemed unusual for the prosecuting side of a case to say publicly during ongoing prosecutions, but it may be impossible to know what kind of plea bargaining strategy may be involved there.
We leave it to the reader to look into the various perspectives and the State's Attorney's own words to decide for yourself. Hopefully with enough context and tools to make an informed decision.
Additional Opinions:
The News-Gazette had a few recent perspective articles on the protests and prosecutions. N-G: perspectives:
- Town Hall | Mob action or overreaction from 7/30/2024. This link includes an opinion piece by many university faculty in defense of the protesters. And State's Attorney Julia Rietz arguing that the charges are appropriate and not in conflict with free speech protections.
- Our Turn | Those who protested and allegedly broke laws should stand trial for their actions, an opinion piece from other university faculty, a variety of other local business owners, and many others.
- The News-Gazette's Opinions Editor Jim Dey took an even harsher defense of the State's Attorney's actions, condemning not just the protesters, but also the faculty who wrote in defense of them and their "uninformed entitlement," "ignorance and arrogance," and what he chides as their "childish" imitation of bravery.
- Contemporary and opposing opinions were expressed soon after the encampment was taken down at the UI Trustees meeting. The News-Gazette had coverage of that here. This gets into some of the more controversial accusations of antisemitism, supporting terrorism, etc.
- A recent LTE criticized the prosecutions as political and decried perceived accusations of antisemitism against the protesters in the News-Gazette. Others letters have accused the State's Attorney of the charges being tied to her public support of Israel or sharply criticized the implication. Others point to the State's Attorney's social media as taking sides in the underlying conflict the protests are about, waving the flag of Israel prominently on it since recently after the October 7th terrorist attacks on Israel.
Related News:
- Coverage of the first summertime charges related to the campus protests earlier this spring for Yafa K. Issa from the Daily Illini and the Illinois Public Media. WCIA coverage indicates she may have been one of those charged who held plywood as a barrier too. The IPM article also notes that there were two arrests at the time of the protests, also for mob action and other charges.
- Coverage of the charges against Kleckner and Sotiropoulos last month from the News-Gazette.
- Contemporary coverage of state legislators visiting the protesters. The supporters of the protesters attempted to highlight the diversity of religious views among them to dispel broader accusations of antisemitism.
- Contemporary coverage after the protests from the News-Gazette and IPM in May.
- The reaction of other universities in light of their campus protests this year from the News-Gazette and IPM on both free speech policies and policing.
- University of Illinois policy changes regarding protests, from the News-Gazette.
- The Daily Illini with a brief overview of the new I-Team to help students engage in "expressive activities" deemed appropriate by the University.
No comments:
Post a Comment