Amy Goodman reporting on the Dakota Access Pipeline. (image: Democracy Now!)
North Dakota State’s Attorney Ladd Erickson has dropped criminal trespassing charges against Democracy Now!’s Amy Goodman—and is instead seeking to charge her with participating in a riot, Democracy Now! (10/15/16) reported today.
Both sets of charges relate to Goodman’s coverage of protests against the Dakota Access Pipeline project, which is opposed by a Native American–led coalition that is concerned about its threat to sacred and historic sites, North Dakota’s water resources and the planet’s climate. While accusing a journalist of trespassing for covering a breaking story of vital public interest is a clear threat to freedom of the press (FAIR.org, 9/15/16), a riot charge would be even worse, because it would attempt to criminalize Goodman’s point of view as a reporter.
In emails to Goodman’s lawyer quoted by Democracy Now!, Erickson acknowledged that it would be difficult to convict Goodman of trespassing because of “legal issues with proving the notice of trespassing requirements in the statute.” But Erickson suggested that Goodman could be charged with rioting because she “was not acting as a journalist” while documenting security guards using pepper spray and siccing attack dogs on protesters. Erickson asserted to the Bismarck Tribune (10/11/16) that Goodman was “a protester, basically. Everything she reported on was from the position of justifying the protest actions.”
Erickson’s professors at law school no doubt explained to him that the First Amendment does not permit prosecutors to charge people with crimes based on their point of view. Whether Goodman was covering the story because she thought it was important news or because she sympathized with the protesters—or simply because she’s doing the job she’s paid to do—does not affect the fact that she was acting as a reporter. Under Erickson’s legal theory, reporters covering Birmingham’s protests in the 1960s would have been stripped of the protection of the Bill of Rights if it could be proved that they intended to show that Bull Connor’s treatment of civil rights marchers was unjust. This kind of interrogation of journalists’ motives needs to be rejected, and hopefully will be when Erickson’s request to charge Goodman goes before a District Judge John Grinsteiner on Monday, October 17.
As the Center for Constitutional Rights’ Katherine Franke said in response to Erickson’s prosecutorial threat:
Filming Native Americans being violently attacked as they defend their land is not rioting, it’s called journalism, it is protected by the First Amendment, and indeed, it is an essential function in a democratic society.
Deia Schlosberg
Meanwhile, documentary filmmaker Deia Schlosberg has been charged in North Dakota’s Pembina County with three felony counts in connection with her filming Dakota Access protests: conspiracy to theft of property, conspiracy to theft of services and conspiracy to tampering with or damaging a public service (Huffington Post, 10/14/16). These charges, too, appear to be based on prosecutors’ presumption that Schlosberg was sympathetic to the protest, which State’s Attorney Ryan Bialas deemed to be “not a protest” but “a criminal action.” It seems it’s illegal for journalists to have political opinions in North Dakota.
Jim Naureckas is the editor of FAIR.org. You can follow him on Twitter at @JNaureckas.
Its not only duty of the reporters to report all things as news but some time need to help the people to save their lives. Amy Goodman is doing her duty but she is also checking the factors that are influencing the democracy. So over all she is doing good job
As a member of the California State Bar for almost 40 years, I ask all those who conclude that attorneys are, as a class, pathetic, desperate and shameless lickspittles to, and agents of, the Power Elite to remember that some of us are your sons, husbands, wives, daughters and mothers. We aren’t all so benighted; the first amendment was part of our legal training.
It’s always a pleasure to see such a person as Ladd Erickson, Esq., hoist by his own petard. I sincerely hope he is justly rewarded for his spectacular “work.”
Let me get this straight, So it’s a question of the reporter’s view that “determines” the reporter’s “motive.” And the state, unilaterally, decides accordingly?
If a journalist covers an event with a view that _the state determines_ is sympathetic with the state’s actions, she is “protected” by the First Amendment. Whereas, if she covers the identical event with a view _the state determines_ sympathizes with the protesters, she transforms–as a matter of law–into a dissident, a protester, an active “participant” in the riot (thus a “rioter”)?
Is this Red China, Stalin’s Russia, a really bad Orwellian nightmare where the power structure decides that an action has legal consequences depending on whether _the state determines_ the coverage supports the belief system of the ruling power structure or undermines it? Sket-chy!
Authoritarians of the world, unite!
Be well.
Slippery Slopes and all that . . . .
This is nothing new, folks. Or havent you been paying attention. As soon as you accepted the concept that activities which the Constitution protects as “free speech” can be restricted solely to “free speech zones”, you accepted the thin edge of the knife that is now bleeding you dry. You cant allow the government to cordon off free speech in isolated pockets of pseudoexistence, and then expect them to “follow the rules” on issues such as freedom of the press.
While I tend to side with Thoreau on the presumption that a government is within its rights to put you in jail for protesting in a way that obstructs traffic or commerce, endangers other people or infringes on private property, that in no way invalidates the actions of a protester who does such things. The whole point of “PROTEST” is that you ARE confronting the established power structure, and refusing to follow their rules. Any American who sat idly by when Clinton (yes, Billy-boy was the prime culprit) was introducing the concept of “free speech zones”, or when Obama decided to authorize the extrajudicial killing of noncombatants (including American citizens) has no reason to wave their hands in the air now, as if their freedoms are just now coming under attack.
“Is this Red China, Stalin’s Russia, a really bad Orwellian nightmare… ”
All three. Are you really so far out of the loop that you hadnt figured that out yet?
When Ralph Waldo Emerson visited Thoreau in Concord jail, after he refused to pay taxes to support the Mexican war, Emerson asked, “Henry, what are you doing in there?” Thoreau replied, “Waldo, the real question is: ‘what are YOU doing out THERE’?”
KM, we’re on the same side, brother (or sister).
I suspect the USSC’s “time, place and manner” construct paved the way to the “slippery slope.” No local elected official would have the balls to limit speech so egregiously, I agree.
W’s/Cheney’s quarantine of free speech to certain acceptable spaces was absolutely nauseating and offensive to the First Amendment.
I understand that at the national level, our betters pretty much not only determine our national economic and political discourse, but vet our presidential candidates as well. Locally, we may yet have _some_ discretion. Fear not, I am very familiar with Hellinger and Judd, Chomsky, Wolff, Quigley, Bernays, and C. Wright Mills.
Heck, I even saw “The Matrix” and “They Live!” And, like Emerson, I remain on the streets to continue the good fight… Martyrdom does become me. So far.
Be well.
The Matrix? Meh
They Live? NOW THATS HOW YOU DO REVOLUTIONARY SOCIAL COMMENTARY!
Also the one and only chance for Rowdy Roddy Piper to show off his considerable acting chops. (^c,^)
Not the first time for Amy, and won’t be the last.
I absolutely agree this is an appalling abuse and extremely sickening.
I do wish FAIR had not used the way overused cliché “War on …” in the
headline. That trivializes war.
Please retire this cliché immediately & replace with “Assault on “, or
“Attack on”, etc.
I double-agree that this is an appalling abuse and extremely sickening. By which I mean, the use of empty modifiers such as “way overused” in describing a cliché The essence of the definition of “cliché” is that something is “overused,” “way,” or not.
Please eliminate such clutter in future. That trivializes adjectives.
Seig steve! ✋
Someone like Amy Goodman never stops being a journalist, it would be like telling Picasso, well you didn’t paint today so you are not an artist today. The video that we saw of the dogs bloodied by biting peaceful protectors was horrendous, even if Amy had not said a word, or had not commented. We are progressing even more to an Orwellian state of mind and of law. We need to make sure that Amy’sc case and the case against Deia Schlosberg do not take us deeper into the rabbit hole of dystopia.
and not just the non-native journalists, but also the native journalists, and the protectors of sacred sites, burials, and clean water.
This is what I see as Trump policies in action. “It’s the liberal media! They’re the problem.” I’m sorry, but that is why we have “freedom of the press’: to keep us informed.
I’ve written emails to the North Dakota attorney general (ndag@nd.gov) registering my disbelief at the action of his state’s attorneys, Ladd Erickson and Ryan Bialas. Anyone else game for clogging up their email servers?
I’m game… this is an atrocity. Can’t even imagine the fury of being criminalized for trying to communicate civil wrongdoing in an amicable fashion. This is tyranical censorship of perspective—suppression of the first amendment is utterly alarming:
According to the ACLU in observaion of the 1st amendment:
“Taking photographs and videos of things that are plainly visible from public spaces is your constitutional right. You have the right to videotape and audiotape police officers performing official duties in public.”
Can’t see this holding up in court.. I feel this is more of a censorship scare tactic designed to discourage journalists and activists from covering DAPL and interrupting oil profits…
North Dakota State’s Attorney Ladd Erickson would undermine a free press, which is the essence of democracy. If there was any doubt that America has become an oligarchy, this should dispel it. Before Citizens United handed Congress over to the super-rich, not even a Republican officeholder would have tried to put a journalist in jail for merely reporting the news.
interesting….wonder who has him in their pocket?
Attorney for North Dakota should be fired, dismissed, removed, and disbarred for violating Goodmans 11st amendment rights. And anyone or anything colluding with prosecutor should bear the same punishment as above. George Washington and Thomas Jefferson would of hung that sold out shill prosecutor by the neck until death. President Trump is coming and these violations will be a thing of past soon.
This post may be out-of-date. Amy Goodman’s rioting charge dropped on 10/17/2016, by judge in county court. The documentarian in Pembina County I’m barely familiar with. CBC radio had a short report since it’s on the Canadian border, but don’t know if there’s a disposition.