The eight people arrested ahead of the Republican National Convention say they were just exercising their protest rights. But each faces a felony charge accusing them of advancing terrorism, raising questions about who qualifies as a "terrorist" under state law.
Prosecutors say the defendants created fear in an attempt to keep delegates from attending the convention. Civil rights advocates and others say prosecutors are misusing a statute that defines terrorism too broadly.
It's no small distinction. The defendants face up to 7 1/2 years in prison if convicted.
"Political demonstration that turns rowdy or violent may involve criminal activity, but to call it terrorism is losing all sense of perspective," said Jameel Jaffer, director of the ACLU's national security project in New York. "The government is pushing the envelope."
The definition of terrorism has shifted over the years. But since Sept. 11, 2001, the federal government has been fairly consistent in applying anti-terrorism laws and sentencing enhancements to cases of suspected international terrorists or people making large-scale threats, said Stephen Vladeck, associate professor at American University Washington College of Law.
"One of the biggest concerns among scholars who debate the definition of terrorism is that an overbroad definition would both dilute the real sense of terrorism and punish conduct that has traditionally been a far more minor offense," Vladeck said.
"We have to be increasingly careful, especially in today's climate, to separate out traditionally relatively petty criminal offenses from those to which we add the terrorism label."
Vladeck said the St. Paul cases are interesting because he thinks Ramsey County prosecutors are calling an act terrorism where the federal government would not.
The defendants, ranging in age from 19 to 33, are members of an anarchist group called the RNC Welcoming Committee. The group had a Web site on which it advocated plans to "Crash the Convention" with road blockades and other actions, and offered logistical support.
The Minnesota statute, among other qualifications, says a crime furthers terrorism if it's intended to interfere with the conduct of government or the right of lawful assembly.
"In this instance, the clear intent of the RNC Welcoming Committee, as expressed on their own Web site, was to stop the delegates from getting to the Xcel Energy Center," Ramsey County Attorney Susan Gaertner said.
The statute was enacted in 2002 at a time when many states were creating anti-terrorism laws. At least one of the authors said it was intended to be broad.
"We were talking about domestic and international terrorism in whatever way, shape, or form it took as it affected us back in Minnesota," said Rich Stanek, the Hennepin County sheriff and former chairman of a House public safety committee.
He said the bill's authors didn't have specific events, such as convention protests, in mind. Rather, they focused on the planning of a crime and the criminal acts themselves. "The statute, I think, is sound," he said.
John Kingrey, director of the Minnesota County Attorneys Association, said he's not surprised the statute is being used in this case. "If they were creating fear ... the potential for extensive damage ... it probably would be appropriate," he said.
Similar issues were raised in New York in 2004, when some gang members were indicted under that state's anti-terrorism statutes for a 2002 gang-related killing and for allegedly trying to "intimidate or coerce" others in their Bronx neighborhood. Critics said the charges blurred the line between common street crime and terrorism. Still, one of the gang members was convicted last year — the first time jurors found a defendant guilty under New York's statute.
The prosecutor in that case had said the terrorism charge was appropriate — just as racketeering laws aimed at mobsters have since been used to prosecute other crimes.
Gaertner said that in Minnesota, the law is clear.
"The Legislature, when they created the anti-terrorism statute, made a clear choice to have it cover violent acts that were intended to disrupt people's right of lawful assembly," Gaertner said. "People think of terrorism as foreign extremists blowing up vehicles or flying airplanes into buildings. The Legislature saw it as broader than that."
Jordan Kushner, an attorney for one of the defendants, said applying the anti-terrorism statute is "abusive."
"People have been labeled terrorists for trying to organize a mass demonstration against the Republican National Convention," he said. "It's outrageous that you would be charged with terrorism for that."
More than 800 people were arrested in St. Paul and Minneapolis during the convention. Most arrests were for various misdemeanors, which, under state law, would carry a maximum sentence of 90 days, or $1,000 fine.
More from Associated Press | Top of Page
Useful article? Use these tools to let someone know:
Send & Share | Print | Access RSS Feed for Syndication
