OCR Text |
Show BSi art 4iMcit94 is the jmStiif UiHttst, k firfnytss Pttfttrsr Binisa itsitaesf EDITOR: MARK FDOINGTON THE DAILY HERALD 4 MONDAY, APRiL 27, !M8 Expanded racketeering ruling could silence protected dissen Congress wrote an intentionally ague and loosely worded law in 1970 as a tool to combat organized crime the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO). The American legal system being what it ia, RICO was soon put to snore imaginative uses. Its civil provisions triple damages and the opportunity to smear made it a somebody as a racketeer favorite among plaintiffs' lawyers. , Soon tenants were suing racketeer landlords under RICO, and divorcing wives were suing their "racketeer husbands. And a chorus of Xflioes, left and right, warned that it was just a matter of time before .sqmeone managed to use RICO against political protesters, .,. That has now happened, but because the target group demonstrators is very much out of favor with civil liberties groups and the chattering classes, the chorus haa been mostly silent. One who did speak up, Harvard law professor Charles Ogletree, said this use of RICO "is unprecedented and raises serious questions about chilling important oportunities for political protest. This stretches the law beyond its logical limits." The political stretching was accom , anti-abortio- n plished by the National Organization for Women (NOW) and two abortion clinics in a civil suit against activists. Last week a U.S. District Court jury in Chicago decided that two groups and their leaders had engaged in a conspiracy to commit extortion and threats of violence against those operating or patronising abortion clinics. Lethal violence, such as arson and bombing, was not an issue in this suit. The activists were accused of making threats, blocking clinic doorways, putting glue in door locks, occasional grabbing and pushing and pulling the hair of doctors or patients, and "creating an atmosphere" that made arson and bombing possible. All lawbreaking deserves punishment, but RICO allows these mostly offenses to be lumped together and seen as a nationwide conspiracy to intimidate abortion doctors and patients. Congress specifically intended to make conspiracy easy to demonstrate in mob cases under RICO, two violations over a period of 10 years, even relatively trivial offenses, can be defined as a pattern of racketeering activity, But using this easy standard against political protesters should raise eyebrows. the right of a store or clinic to solicit business or an individual's right of 12-ye- ar anti-aborti- anti-aborti- provide services free of fear, including "fear of wrongful economic injury." Surely Woolworth customers and owners would have qualified for the same property rights, and the "fear of wrongful economic injury" was beyond dispute. Woolworth lost $200,000 durThat's why it capituing the lated. It takes little imagination to see how almost any protest group could be hammered by RICO, from Greenpeace and nuclear protesters to Cesar Chavez's grape boycott (which certainly induced the growers1 fear of wrongful economic injury). This has been clear for years. In 1970, the ACLU opposed RICO as being "one of the most potent, and potentially abusive, weapons for silencing dissent." Since then, the ACLlfs voice has been more muted and ambivalent, mostly because the group's feminist allies argued hard that RICO was an ideal weapon to use in the abortion wars. The ACLU really ought to make an effort to recapture the clarity and principled position it staked out in 1970. Either you believe in First Amendment rights or you don't. access to a clinic, so even momentary interference, such as blocking a doorway, can be deprivation of property or extortion. RICO could easily have been used r to quell the protests of the 1960s, as the American Civil Liberties Union noted years ago. But thanks to the language of RICO decisions, it could also be used against nonviolent protests and simIf RICO had been written ple a decade earlier, segregationists would surely have used it to cut the legs out from under the civil rights movement. In the 1960 Woolworth sit-iin Greensboro, N.C., the "property rights" of Woolworth to attract paying customers would have been seen as violated by conspirators who tied up the counter seats for months. The black football players who stood around protecting the demonstrators would have been depicted as an illegal intimidating force. ' sit-in- anti-wa- i ) ,ii anti-aborti- ever-broadeni- f, ,nTf John Leo - JL When combined with the severe threat of triple damages, it invites the use of the courts as arenas to punish political enemies. One of the drafters of RICO, Notre Dam law professor G. Robert B'dk.-ly- , warns that under RICO, a a bit of pushing minor illegality and shoving, or a rock thrown can transform a through a window constitutionally protected demonstration into an attempt at "extortion." The concepts of "extortion and "obtaining property" used in RICO cases come from another law, the Kobbs Act, and courts have constantly broadened their meanings. "Property" now means anything of value, such as low-lev- el sit-in- s. lunch-count- er n In the Chicago case, the judge's instructions to the jury stressed that property rights included the right of women to use the clinics and the right of clinic operators to anti-abortio- n s. John Leo is a columnist for Universal Press Syndicate. a mirthful bunch once a day on the job, twice as many as those who are so sour at home. More evidence that men are from By BERN1CE KANNER NEW YORK WeVa all heard that if you laugh, the whole world Mars and women from Venus is what makes them laugh. laughs with you; cry, and you cry A joka or funny story is likelier to alone. So the question is this: Is the world jovial, or are we Americans make more men laugh (33 percent) than anything else. For women, an .solitary pockets of 6adnes? It turns out we are a lot more amusing conversation is not ss wirthful than you might have laugh- - provoking (22 percent). 500 Women are a little more likely to on of a based 'guessed, survey , Cincinnati-conducted by laugh at the antics of people or anipeople h&md Burke mals than men are (21 percent and 18 Marketing There's little variaResearch. percent, respectiveAnd surprising ly). Bat a clever turn laugh-omet- er on the tion cf a phrase or pun or all the ly, despite a TV sitcom is likely verHollywood based on to tease a giggle sions of work as A ? Income. But there is from around 11 perhellish inferno, cent of both men we're also consid- some statistical dif LI Jil. and women. erauiy.more mircn- ; Some 8 percent of ful on we job than ference based on gen home. Are at people, both men wjf der. and women, laugh Fifty-twpercent ' when they're caught ofOfcn nd 57 per- - 1 in a bizarre situaceECof women say ' tion, and 4 percent thftXlaugh at least of each gender laugh out of embaron&an hour at home, while 61 of rassment. m8?and 57 percent of women laugh More people describe their laugh water hour at the 6t4east once an fcooSSr. style as moderate in intensity and volume than anything else, but three j "Kot surprisingly, young people times as many women as men (27 laugh more overall than older folks, percent vs. 9 percent) depict their j A'pung adults agee 18 to 24 are style as giggly. jngw than twice as likely as older Some 18 percent cf women and 12 jvokpre to laugh oftej at their of men say they laugh till percent of (76 percent young adults, Some 11 percent of women cry. they of 35 percent compared with 18 percent cf men characterise and seniors). their laugh style as loud and boister"And employment ads might do best keeping out the location if it's In ous. And 11 percent representing both sexes say they laugh in a quiet the Northeast. Six percent of and dignified manner. enlpbycca laugh lens often than Westerners of both sexes are least S "normal here, compared with perto call their laughter giggly (9 likely cent overall. Even at home, as are older people (4 perto tend be percent), mora Ndrfheasterners cent of those between 63 and 64 and oiftHber. 8 percent of those over 83). I Tkere'i little variation on the , Young folks 18 to 24 are considerfathometer based on Income. But ably likelier to laugh raucously (28 there is Isome statistical difference percent) than any other age seg. on render. ment. tree percent of men figure they on the Job lass than once a day BERNICE KANNER writes on vtad les8 ihsn the 4 percent who and marketing frvm her advertising home, at fu$sw that infrequently New York and is the author in base consider-bj&iss- a is office tha women, of 'Lies My Parents Told Ma" (St. joyous than heme, Four Martins Prtsal e$fnt of women laugh leas than . . o . . 1 . ked i i jtr . . Although we have moved from Provo, we lived there for many years and still enjoy reading your local newspaper. Therefore, it's been somewhat surprising to read the negative comments about Richard Mack. I know Mack personally and vouch for both his good character and hie understanding of the proper role of government. He demonstrated In his 18 years of public service that his oath of office means more than just a ticket to receive a paycheck. As a police officer in Provo for sheriff 10 years, and as a in Graham County, Aril., he was required to "solemnly swear to uphold and defend the Constitution. Or, using words similar to that he promised the people he was serving, that he would support, obey and defend both the federal and the state constitutions. As a professional, veteran peace officer, he has shown by example that he takes the oath seriously. As an elected sheriff, he was 'in a position to take action when Congress passed a bill, he recognised as an unconstitutional violation of states rii'ts. At great personal sacrifice, he fought the domestic , t ' d, ( enemy through the courts and wont In this time of rampnnt fedpral encroachment, the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in favor of Mack's position was a great victory for states rights, It was perhaps the most important state lights victory during the past century. If Mack had ignored Congress' Stvve Pratt Beaver mi mm sramus tms poucy two-ter- well-traine- to mz mrmnv' violation of the Constitution, perhaps he could have personally written more speeding tickets and would have enjoyed more leisure time at home, hut such a course of inaction would have been a violation of his oath of office. Thank Ood there are still men likfe Mack who are good, honest and wise public servants who will labor diligently. The Daily Herald welcomes letters to the editor. Letters must be signed and include the author's name, address and daytime telephone number for verification. The writer's name and city of residence will be published, but the writer's address and phone number will not. Whenever possible, letters should be typed and double spaced. To allow the t repression of as many viewpoints as possible, letters must be no longer than 400 words; 250 words or less is encouraged. The Herald reserves the right to edit Wt ttrs for length and content. The Herald encourages community discussion oi issues. However, we will not publish letters that are libelous or in bad taste. Letters written anonymously will be discarded. Pleare send your letters to: Editor The Daily Herald P.O. Box 717 1555 N. Freedom Blvd. , Provo, UT. 84003 U'tters may also be faxed. That number is If you have questions, call Opinions Pane Editor Mtjrk or Managing Eddinfctort at Editor Mike Patrick at 373-648- 344-254- 4 344-254- i : By Garry Trudeau De&ijesbury iii. Ttssnk Sod for nlaeh mi iim 1 tjt0r""M Mallard Fillmore By Bruco Tinsley I i fmfint imxHt mimt . tte 2 .ar. or-- 13 EX- - L fi L f ' . |