PEACE ACTIVISTS CONTINUE LEGAL ODYSSEY IN D.C.’S SUPERIOR COURT



WHO: The Pledge of Resistance was formed for individuals willing to engage in nonviolent civil resistance to first prevent and later to protest the war in Iraq. It is affiliated with several national peace groups, including the National Campaign for Nonviolent Resistance and United For Peace & Justice.



On September 26 & 27, 2006, Pledge members joined with activists from around the country in protests organized by the Declaration of Peace aimed at telling Congress to cut off funding for the war in Iraq. In response, the peace advocates were denied access to their legislators and arrested on Capitol Hill. The 71 peace activists arrested on Sept. 26 were charged with either “crossing a police line” or “unlawful assembly.” The 26 citizens who were arrested outside the Rayburn House Building on Sept. 27 were charged with “unlawful assembly.”



The defendants were either prosecuted in a trial which concluded on February 16 or March 14, 2007. Both trials were conducted by Chief Judge Rufus King III, and all but one activist were convicted and sentenced to pay a $50 assessment fee. Eleven defendants wrote letters to the judge to inform him that in good conscience they would not pay the fee. These refusniks felt they were unjustly convicted, and paying the fine would be an admission of guilt. On May 11, eight of them appeared before King, who found them in contempt. He intended to incarcerate them, but renowned First Amendment attorney Mark Goldstone had to explain to Judge King and the prosecutor that since the defendants were now facing a year in jail, they were eligible for a jury trial. The judge eventually concurred and ordered the activists to appear on June 1 before Judge John Ramsey Johnson for a status hearing. However, King urged Goldstone and the prosecutor to work out a deal, as the judge did not want to appear as a witness in the contempt trial.



WHAT: On June 1, Mark Goldstone and four of the original defendants who refused to pay the $50 assessment fee, Maria Allwine from Baltimore, Michelle Grise from Virginia, Joan Nicholson from Pennsylvania, and Max Obuszewski from Baltimore, appeared before Judge Johnson. It became evident that there were legal disagreements between the judge, the prosecutor and the attorney-advisor as to how to proceed with a contempt trial and what possible sentence the defendants might face upon conviction.



Goldstone filed a Motion for Dismissal of the contempt charge, and each defendant echoed the call to dismiss. Goldstone pointed out to the court that most of the original eleven defendants made donations to nonprofit organizations in an amount exceeding $550. The government was opposed to dismissal.



Obuszewski argued that the case should be dismissed on the grounds of judicial expediency. Why should the government expend enormous time and money on a jury trial with a possible eleven defendants over a failure to pay a $50 assessment fee? He also pointed out that the original conviction is on appeal, and that the contempt matter could become moot depending upon the appeals court decision.



More legal research is necessary before a contempt trial can commence. So Judge Johnson ordered the government to file a brief stating its position by June 29, and the defendants were to respond with their legal pleadings by July 20. Finally, he scheduled another status hearing at which arguments would be made as to how to proceed.



WHEN: Friday, August 24, 2007 at 2 PM



WHERE: District of Columbia Superior Court, 500 Indiana Ave., NW, Washington, DC



WHY: Prior to the May 11 contempt hearing, Obuszewski wrote a brief to Judge King stating his position: “As a long-time dissenter to unjust government practices, the defendant frequently interacts with police. It is not unusual for the police to deny citizens their Constitutionally-protected rights.” Obuszewski believes his First Amendment rights were violated on Sept. 26, 2006 and that Judge King erred in siding with the police.



Those arrests on Sept. 26 and 27, 2006 continue to have legal ramifications, and it is unclear when this legal odyssey might conclude. Nevertheless, the antiwar activists intend to explore all legal options in both a jury trial for the contempt charge and during the

appeals process aimed at overturning the original convictions. The other seven refusniks are Johnny Barber from Florida, Mike Dorn and Elizabeth McAlister from Baltimore’s Jonah House, Philip Runkel from Wisconsin, Kay Warren from Oregon, Rev. Bill Wylie-Kellerman from Michigan and Jerry Zawada from Nevada.