From: Wpa4mumia@aol.com See two messages below. Don't forget our meeting tonight (3/1/00) at 7PM. See www.wpa4mumia.org for more info. ***************************************** February 28, 2000 *** FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE *** ONE HUNDRED EIGHTY-FIVE ARRESTED AT U.S. SUPREME COURT AS IT HEARS LANDMARK DEATH PENALTY CASE THREE HUNDRED FORTY-EIGHT ARRESTS NATIONWIDE ACTIVISTS DEMAND NEW TRIAL FOR DEATH ROW JOURNALIST MUMIA ABU-JAMAL AND ABOLITION OF THE DEATH PENALTY Washington, D.C. "Grant a New Trial/Abolish the Death Penalty" was the call Monday morning at 10 AM February 28 as one hundred eighty-five people, including former South African political prisoner Dennis Brutus and Jennifer Harbury, lawyer and widow of a slain Guatemalan resistance leader, were arrested during a dramatic, nonviolent civil disobedience action at the U.S. Supreme Court. This action and its companion support vigil called for a new trial for award-winning journalist and death row inmate Mumia Abu-Jamal. The three thousand strong demonstration also demanded abolition of capital punishment in the U.S. All of the arrested protesters were charged with unlawful conduct and impeding traffic on the Supreme Court grounds. Rev. Nozomi Ikuta, President of the National Inter-religious Task Force on Criminal Justice and Rev. Michael Yasutake, an officer of the National Council of Churches Racial Justice Working Group were also arrested. The CD and companion vigil brought together renowned labor leaders, religious figures, entertainers, human rights activists and academicians. Among human rights leaders speaking at the support vigil were Sam Jordan, Director of Amnesty International's Program to Abolish the Death Penalty, Steven Hawkins, Executive Director of the National Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty, and Pam Africa, Director of International Concerned Family and Friends of Mumia Abu-Jamal. At a simultaneous demonstration in San Francisco, one hundred sixty-three people were arrested for blocking the front entrances of the U.S. Court of Appeals. The arrest total for the day was three hundred forty-eight for the two civil disobedience demonstrations. Demonstrations were also slated for Los Angeles, Toronto and other cities in the US and Canada. As people were arrested outside, the US Supreme Court was considering "Williams vs. Taylor (99-6615)" - a landmark case challenging restrictions to habeas corpus law by the 1996 Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act. "This decision will greatly impact Mumia's case because it will set the boundaries for federal judges - either they will be able to conduct independent reviews of state cases or they are going to be severely restricted in independent reviews in what they do," said Abu Jamal's lead attorney Leonard Weinglass. "What Williams is about is whether or not federal judges have to accept the findings of state court judges or whether or not they are independent -- habeas corpus is our most valued human right." Mumia Abu-Jamal's case has shone an international spotlight on the arbitrary use of the death penalty in the U.S. On January 31, Illinois Republican Governor George Ryan instituted a temporary halt to executions in his state after 13 Illinois death row inmates were found innocent. Two weeks later, on February 10, the Philadelphia City Council joined many other municipalities nationwide in passing a resolution calling for a moratorium on their state's executions. And on February 22, the Judiciary Committee of Pennsylvania's Senate held hearings on Senate Bill 952 which calls for a 2-year moratorium on executions in Pennsylvania. At present Pennsylvania Federal District Judge William Yohn is reviewing Abu-Jamal's petition for habeas corpus to overturn his conviction based on 29 constitutional violations during the initial trial. Noting that this celebrated author has thus far failed in the courts, educator Herman Ferguson, co-chair of the New York based-Free Mumia Abu-Jamal Coalition said, "Civil disobedience is as American as apple pie, from the Boston Tea Party to the labor movement, from the civil rights sit-ins, anti-war and anti-nuclear activism, right up to the recent police brutality protests, civil disobedience has always shown the people's willingness to prevail against injustice." Today's actions followed a July 3rd, 1999 action at the Liberty Bell and a simultaneous one in San Francisco where one hundred twenty- two people were arrested. That was the first action of a civil disobedience campaign that organizers plan to continue until Mr. Abu-Jamal gets a new trial. The cumulative arrest total for the two actions is four hundred seventy. The demonstration was organized by the Free Mumia Abu-Jamal Coalition and the February 28th Coalition for Mumia. In October 1998 Pennsylvania's Supreme Court denied Mumia's bid for a new trial, upholding the original trial judge's ruling. The journalist, MOVE supporter and former member of the Black Panther Party, was convicted in 1981 of the shooting death of a Philadelphia police officer in a trial tainted by the flagrant bias of that judge, the deliberate exclusion of 11 Black jurors and a court appointed lawyer who, by his own admission, was inexperienced in criminal law. In addition, witnesses came forward during the 1995 Post Conviction Relief Appeal hearing saying they were coerced by police to lie, suppress or change their initial account of the Dec. 9, 1981 incident. THE FREE MUMIA ABU-JAMAL COALITION, P.O. BOX 650 NEW YORK, NY 10009 -- 212-330-8029 CONTACT: JOHN RILEY - 917-653-7267 SABRINA GREEN - 703-750-2231 From: "C. Clark Kissinger" Mumia and the U.S. Supreme Court by C. Clark Kissinger The United States Supreme Court has two standards: One for white supremacists and one for Black revolutionaries. The case of David Dawson shows how zealous the U.S. Supreme Court can be in protecting the rights of white supremacists and other reactionaries. Dawson broke out of a Delaware prison, went on a crime spree, murdered a woman, and was subsequently recaptured and sentenced to death. In the sentencing phase of Dawson’s trial, the prosecution introduced the fact that Dawson was a member of the “Aryan Brotherhood” white prison gang, and had swastikas and the words “Aryan Brotherhood” tattooed on his body. When the Delaware Supreme Court earlier upheld the death sentence for Dawson, one of the cases they cited as precedent was the Pennsylvania case of Commonwealth v. Abu-Jamal. The Delaware court said that if Mumia’s membership in the Black Panthers could be used to sentence him to death, then Dawson’s membership in the Aryan brotherhood could be used for the same purpose. The U.S. Supreme Court overturned Dawson’s execution, with Chief Justice Rehnquist writing the decision saying: “We have held that the First Amendment protects an individual’s right to join groups and associate with others holding similar beliefs. . . . Even if the Delaware group to which Dawson allegedly belongs is racist, those beliefs, so far as we can determine, had no relevance to the sentencing proceeding in this case.” In other words, good ol’ boy Dawson was just exercising his constitutional rights to join a white supremacist organization, and how can the exercise of his constitutional rights of free speech and free association be used as an argument for his execution? But the Supreme Court didn’t stop here. It went on to overturn the death sentence of Dale Edward Flanagan in Nevada. Flanagan murdered his grandparents in the hope of receiving a cut of their insurance money and estate. He was arrested, tried, and convicted of the murder. But at the sentencing hearing, the prosecution introduced evidence that Flanagan was a “devil worshipper” and “as antiChrist as it can get.” Witnesses were called in to testify that Flanagan was part of a “coven” of devil worshippers. Once again the U.S. Supreme Court was outraged. Here was a state government trying to make an emotional appeal to a jury by saying that good ol’ Dale was a devil worshipper. Worshipping the devil is protected by the constitution under freedom of religion. This time the Supreme Court didn’t even bother to have a hearing. It overturned Flanagan’s death sentence and sent the case back to Nevada, citing their decision in the Dawson case. But what happened when Mumia Abu-Jamal appealed his death sentence to the U.S. Supreme Court? The facts were the same. The prosecution had introduced his previous membership in the Black Panther Party as well as his written and spoken political statements (none of which were relevant to the case). Was the Supreme Court shocked? Did it say, “You can’t sentence Mumia to death on the basis of his exercise of constitutionally protected rights”? No, the U.S. Supreme Court wouldn’t even hear Mumia’s case! This is a court that meets in secret, answers to no one, and doesn’t have to give reasons for its actions. In highly political cases like Mumia’s, its decisions have nothing to do with “facts” or “law” or “justice.” Constitutional rights shield white supremacists and devil worshippers -- not Black revolutionaries or any who speak for the oppressed and threaten the system. Real justice comes about only when the people demand it in a way that cannot be ignored. ==============================> vegetarian, nonviolence, consensus -Food Not Bombs List fnb-l@lists.tao.ca -distributing food in opposition to violence -archive: http://archive.foodnotbombs.ca -active cities: http://webcom.com/peace -send '(un)subscribe fnb-l' to lists@tao.ca