- Oct 17, 2011
- 33,784
- 37,122
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Legal Union (Other)
There have been a lot of accusations here that the protestors are 'supporting Hamas'. I guess with respect to these two specific organizations, we'll find out.
[A]ccording to a new lawsuit, the protests might have also revealed a disturbing relationship between Hamas and two U.S.-based groups, American Muslims for Palestine (AMP) and National Students for Justice in Palestine (NSJP).
International law firm Greenberg Traurig, in a news release last week, announced a lawsuit seeking “compensatory damages for nine American and Israeli victims of the attack in which Hamas killed 1,200 people and took 240 people hostage, alleg[ing] that AMP and NSJP work in the United States as collaborators and propagandists for Hamas. Hamas is a United States designated Foreign Terrorist Organization.”
“There is a legal chasm between independent advocacy and knowingly serving as the propaganda and recruiting wing of a Foreign Terrorist Organization in the United States. AMP and NSJP are the latter,” the plaintiffs allege. “They are not innocent advocacy groups, but rather the propaganda arm of a terrorist organization operating in plain sight.”
A 2010 Supreme Court opinion written by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. is on point. “Congress has prohibited the provision of ‘material support or resources’ to certain foreign organizations that engage in terrorist activity,” Roberts wrote.
In short, both conduct and speech may be prosecuted if material support is “coordinated with or under the direction of a designated foreign terrorist organization.” However, “independent advocacy that might be viewed as promoting the group’s legitimacy is not covered.” Roberts’s opinion held that the statute is not on its face unconstitutional, while leaving open that it might run afoul of constitutional protection in some contexts.
Constitutional scholar Laurence Tribe tells me, “Unless there are credible allegations of direct assistance, as in training and the like, to Hamas and affiliate[d] terrorist groups, the 1st Amendment seems likely to pose a huge obstacle.”
[A]ccording to a new lawsuit, the protests might have also revealed a disturbing relationship between Hamas and two U.S.-based groups, American Muslims for Palestine (AMP) and National Students for Justice in Palestine (NSJP).
International law firm Greenberg Traurig, in a news release last week, announced a lawsuit seeking “compensatory damages for nine American and Israeli victims of the attack in which Hamas killed 1,200 people and took 240 people hostage, alleg[ing] that AMP and NSJP work in the United States as collaborators and propagandists for Hamas. Hamas is a United States designated Foreign Terrorist Organization.”
“There is a legal chasm between independent advocacy and knowingly serving as the propaganda and recruiting wing of a Foreign Terrorist Organization in the United States. AMP and NSJP are the latter,” the plaintiffs allege. “They are not innocent advocacy groups, but rather the propaganda arm of a terrorist organization operating in plain sight.”
A 2010 Supreme Court opinion written by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. is on point. “Congress has prohibited the provision of ‘material support or resources’ to certain foreign organizations that engage in terrorist activity,” Roberts wrote.
In short, both conduct and speech may be prosecuted if material support is “coordinated with or under the direction of a designated foreign terrorist organization.” However, “independent advocacy that might be viewed as promoting the group’s legitimacy is not covered.” Roberts’s opinion held that the statute is not on its face unconstitutional, while leaving open that it might run afoul of constitutional protection in some contexts.
Constitutional scholar Laurence Tribe tells me, “Unless there are credible allegations of direct assistance, as in training and the like, to Hamas and affiliate[d] terrorist groups, the 1st Amendment seems likely to pose a huge obstacle.”
