1/2/25 Leonard Goodman on the Americans Convicted for Opposing the War in Ukraine
Jan 7, 2025
auto_awesome
Leonard Goodman, a criminal defense lawyer and adjunct professor of law at DePaul, shares insights on the Uhuru Movement's legal battles. He discusses the absurd allegations that anti-war activists were acting as Russian agents and the challenges of proving the case. Goodman highlights the implications for free speech and critiques federal prosecutors' motives, pointing out the disparity in legal repercussions between grassroots activists and powerful political figures. The conversation sheds light on the troubling use of espionage laws in suppressing dissent.
The case against the APSP highlights serious concerns regarding governmental overreach and its implications for free speech and dissenting activism.
Despite the initial severity of the charges, the trial concluded with convictions on lesser charges, emphasizing the exaggerated nature of the government’s claims.
Deep dives
Background on the Legal Case
The African People's Socialist Party (APSP), represented by Leonard Goodman, faced legal challenges stemming from accusations of being agents of Russia. The core of the case revolved around their outspoken criticism of the Ukraine war, particularly statements suggesting NATO's provocations leading to the conflict. The prosecution emphasized a trip taken by leader O'Malley Yeshitela to Moscow in 2015 as evidence of foreign allegiance, despite APSP's long history of anti-colonial activism. Ultimately, the trial revealed a lack of credible evidence directly linking the APSP to Russian influence, as many testimonies and documents failed to demonstrate any actual control or direction from foreign entities.
Critique of Government's Actions
The heavy-handed approach employed by federal agents, including SWAT team raids at the homes of the APSP members, raised significant concerns regarding the government’s tactics. The case was viewed as politically motivated, questioning whether the government was trying to suppress dissenting voices associated with the anti-war movement and black liberation. The sheer scale of the resources used, estimated to be around $15 million, drew criticism for targeting a small activist group rather than focusing on actual threats to national security. Goodman pointed out that such prosecutions could set a dangerous precedent for the treatment of political dissent in the U.S.
The Trial's Outcome
During the trial, the jury convicted the leaders of the APSP on a lesser conspiracy charge rather than the more severe espionage charges initially pursued by the government. Despite requesting roughly three years in prison for Yeshitela and two years for Penny Hess, the judge eventually imposed only probation with no jail time or fines, recognizing the exaggerated nature of the government's claims. The convoluted nature of the conspiracy charge raised additional skepticism about the trial's fairness, with jurors expressing confusion over legal definitions. Overall, the prosecution's strategy backfired, leading to a decision that acknowledged the First Amendment implications inherent in their work.
Implications for Free Speech and Activism
The prosecution of the APSP raises significant questions about the state of free speech and civil liberties in contemporary America, particularly for activists who challenge mainstream narratives. Goodman underscored the importance of the appeal process as a way to address the chilling effects such cases may have on political activism, suggesting that other activists might censor themselves due to fear of similar repercussions. The involvement of significant media figures, such as Tucker Carlson, in highlighting the case illuminated broader concerns about governmental overreach. The situation calls for vigilance among activists to ensure that their right to freely express dissenting opinions remains protected against potential governmental retaliation.
Attorney Leonard Goodman returns to the show to talk about the government’s case against his clients in the Uhuru Movement. These left-wing activists have been tied up in court, fighting ridiculous charges that allege they were working for the Russians when they spoke out against the war in Ukraine shortly after it broke out. The trial wrapped up recently. Goodman updates Scott on the results and the likely next steps in this important legal battle for free speech.