In Defense of Freedom of Speech and Assembly: The Charlottesville Lawsuits

In Defense of Freedom of Speech and Assembly: The Charlottesville Lawsuits

In a potentially precedent-setting decision, lawsuits have been brought against members of the new right and alt-right. Those who have come under the legal firestorm include leader of Identity Evropa Eli Mosley, well known alt-righter Richard Spencer, and other less publicly known members of the alt-right. Nathan Damigo explained the lawsuit on a recent stream on alterative media outlet Red Ice TV. Damigo explains the overarching theme of the lawsuit as follows:

A lawsuit was brought saying we went there with the intention to violate people’s civil rights. Essentially, what they are trying to say and convict us with is, they are trying to say a few things, that we went there to essentially harm people and we went there with the intent to violate peoples civil rights and intimidate them.

The reality is that they are attempting to make the argument that their presence in and of itself is violating the civil rights of other parties. Their prosecution of groups such as Identity Evropa who routinely speak out on behalf of white and right wing issues set a potentially dangerous precedent of possible legal action on behalf of cities or other parties every time someone on the right who has a differing opinion speaks. Those who have unpopular opinions know that they could be targeted legally and therefore it will discourage participation in the discourse.

What we need to realize on the right as a whole is that no matter our feelings for the individuals involved or for the movements they are associated with, we must apply free speech to all people, regardless of message and beliefs.

“Lawfare” is the newest form of political oppression. Activist lawyers are forcing people on the right, from Republicans to Trumpers to the Alt-right, to defend their rights to free speech and freedom of assembly in court, effectively making it difficult for many to continue on with their activism after being hit with these major lawsuits. It’s another way to try to shut down free speech by effectively threatening those who put on events and exercise their rights with legal action. Interestingly enough, in the case of Charlottesville, it was the right’s civil rights that were violated!  They had a legal order to go forward with their event in Charlottesville, which was then shut down unlawfully and not a soul was allowed to actually speak in Charlottesville.

Is this the new America that we want? One where those who have dissenting views are silenced through lawfare?

This is nothing more than a type of warfare against conservatives, attempting to keep us from collectively congregating and using our free speech in public. As Eli Mosley, leader of Identity Evropa, said:

This would be a huge setback in a time during Trump where we have three more years to push the envelope, to continue to wake our people up, continue to red pill our people, this would be a huge opportunity cost to our movement.

Consider “opportunity cost”, as Mosley stated. If lawfare becomes the new normal, trying to silence or bankrupt the right, there will be a lot of events and demonstrations that will simply no longer happen in the future because groups will no longer be able to afford it, will be unable to take the risk due to possible legal action after events, or will be worried about speaking out or attending these events because they don’t want to be potentially sued for being simply a participant.

This may be just one lawsuit and one case but it has potentially far reaching impacts on the activism of the right.

On the other hand, the left fails to realize that just as they bring lawfare forward against right-wing events, they are opening themselves up to lawfare as well and attacks on their own events. Once you attack one side, there is always the chance that the attacked side revolts and uses the same tactics against its enemy. These are the rules of war; whatever your enemy enters in to in battle becomes a tactic in play, whether or not the other side should choose to use it.

Regardless of personal political opinions, we must all stop to realize that this fight is our fight too.

It starts with what society wants to call the “fringe”, and it spreads to even the most miniscule, mundane areas of activism. It will have a ripple effect on the greater goals of political activism, especially political activism on the right, no matter how much people want to ignore it. This lawsuit is the beginning of setting a precedent via lawfare that says those using their legal rights to free speech and freedom of assembly will be and can be alternatively prosecuted via use of lawfare.

We cannot allow this to creep in, we must stomp it out before it becomes a liability to all conservative activism.

If interested in contributing to this cause and case please contribute at identityevropa.com/donate or freedomfront.org/donate by making the donation out to “Foundation for The Marketplace of Ideas” with IE on the memo line, and continue fighting for freedom of speech and freedom of assembly for all in America.

Editor’s note: Here at Halsey News, it’s very important to us to allow a broad variety of voices and perspectives to speak and engage in the discourse. That said, there are certain elements of some articles, like this one, where though we may agree with the broader point, we want to make it clear that the editorial team has a different take. While we will include, for example, links to donate to Identity Evropa, we feel that this is a white identitarian organization which we strongly disagree with on many issues, and we encourage readers to look at outlets such as Red Ice TV for themselves and take note of some of their ideological underpinnings many (including the editorial team) find unacceptable. No-platforming is not something we like to do when it comes to controversial topics – but we will certainly clarify our own positions when needed.

Facebook Comments