Categories
News

Anti-racists instruct

During the week leading up to the August 11 and 12 anniversary, local anti-racist groups hosted a series of events, including panels on their use of in-your-face tactics and why they believe the First Amendment should not apply to white supremacists.

Protesters up the ante

UVA religious studies professor Jalane Schmidt opened the August 7 Black Lives Matter event with a terse request: “For everyone’s safety, we’ll ask all police to leave.”

The five-person “Why We Protest” panel discussion took a decidedly brasher tone than previous community events, showcasing the confrontational tactics some Charlottesville activists have embraced.

In the packed Jefferson School African American Heritage Center auditorium, Showing Up for Racial Justice activist Grace Aheron moderated the panel, which included Congregate Charlottesville organizer Brittany “Smash” Caine-Conley, SURJ activist Anna, UVA English professor Lisa Woolfork and UVA Students United activist Ibby Han. In keeping with the SURJ ethos, Aheron forbade audience members from livestreaming the event. “If you want the information, you have to come, or take notes and tell everyone,” she said.

Panelists prefaced the discussion by giving their preferred pronouns and tracing their paths to activism. Anna and Han got their start in campus organizations, while Woolfork was driven to protest out of a desire for “her children to inherit a world better than the one I have.” For Caine-Conley, experiencing police violence during a prayer circle at Standing Rock was the tipping point.

The first question addressed a common objection to protests against white supremacy: Why don’t you just ignore them? “Apathy is not a strategy,” said Woolfork, to a roaring applause. Other panelists argued that public disruption has been an indispensable tool for thwarting the alt-right.

Some on the panel adopted a more elastic definition of protest to accommodate mental and physical handicaps. Anna, a disabled activist, said, “Feeding the homeless is an act of protest to food injustice.”

Panelists endorsed controversial tactics for combating white supremacy, such as denying public figures they associate with fascism a platform and accosting them when they go out in public, an approach that has been used against several White House officials—and Jason Kessler.

Woolfork discouraged arguing with bigots, though other panelists adjusted this stance when someone asked what to do if the bigot is a family member. Struggling through tears, an audience member recalled contentious disputes with her parents, who voted for Donald Trump.

Caine-Conley said as a queer woman with family members who do not accept her, she has found it helpful to tell them stories about her activism. “It causes cognitive dissonance…because I am involved,” she said.

Panelists reiterated the need people to participate in demonstrations, citing the successful push to ban Unite the Right organizer Jason Kessler from UVA. “The arc of justice doesn’t bend naturally,” Han said, “it bends when people push on it.”

Many activists agreed that the biggest threat for the August 12 weekend didn’t come from neo-Nazis. At the #ResilientCville town hall a few weeks ago, several audience members expressed concerns about police overcompensating to make up for last year’s failures. Woolfork echoed these concerns, warning that, if this is the case, “black people will bear the brunt.”—Jonathan Haynes

Free speech victims

Showing Up for Racial Justice sponsored an August 8 lawyers’ panel on free speech and anti-racist work—and how “false notions” about the former “hinder” the latter.

UVA law professor Anne Coughlin called the idea that there’s such a thing as legally protected free speech a “myth.” She said, “We regulate speech all the time.” Free speech gets thrown around as an absolute right, while “the protections are much narrower that people believe,” she said.

Legal Aid Justice Center and National Lawyers Guild attorney Kim Rolla questioned the idea that in an unfettered marketplace of free speech, “truth will shake out.”

Said Rolla, “Right now, the First Amendment is used to punish anti-racists and protect white supremacists.”

SURJ organizer Ben Doherty, who works at the UVA Law Library, elaborated on that theme: July 8, 2017, when “police gave full protection” to the Loyal White Knights of the Ku Klux Klan and tear-gassed anti-racist activists; a federal judge allowing Unite the Right organizer Jason Kessler to hold his violent rally last year “under the guise of free speech;” August 11, 2017,  at UVA, when neo-Nazis and white supremacists carried torches through the Grounds of UVA and “formed a lynch mob” while “police were paralyzed.”

And he listed the UVA law school, which allowed Kessler to be there twice, while arresting an activist “for merely sitting in the office with him.”

Coughlin, who said she has colleagues who say student “snowflakes” are trying to silence free speech, called “completely false” the notion of a “presupposed golden age of free speech and the sharing of ideas freely” when women and African Americans were excluded from law schools.

“We have the power to change the meaning of what’s protected speech and what’s violence,” she said.

White supremacists are now characterizing themselves as victims and “a minority group that’s being silenced,” said Rolla. “To say white folks are victims is really dangerous.”

Trickier for the panelists was how to prevent hate speech from having First Amendment protections.

“I’m hesitant to give more tools to the government to restrict speech,” said Rolla.

“There’s no reason the KKK should be a legal organization in the United States,” said Doherty. “It’s a terrorist group.” He said the government outlawed the Black Panthers through FBI surveillance and infiltration.

Attorney Lloyd Snook was in the audience, and he says that infiltrating the Black Panthers was not the same as passing a law, “Two of the three panelists don’t know their First Amendment history very well.”

The decisions that came out of the Warren U.S. Supreme Court were to protect civil rights organizers, union organizers and Communists, he says. “Later on the KKK and Nazis latched on to that.”

Moderator Lisa Woolfork with free-speech panelists Ben Doherty, Anne Coughlin, and Kim Rolla. staff photo

How Kessler could get a permit for the Unite the Right rally last year was a question from the audience.

In federal court, the basis the city gave for moving the rally was the number of people anticipated for then-Emancipation Park, said Rolla.

Rolla pointed out that then-mayor Mike Signer told ProPublica on Frontline’s “Documenting Hate: Charlottesville” that the city had no knowledge there would be any violence. Rolla called that “astounding” and said, “People stood in front of City Council” with information of the violent intentions of rally-goers, and there should have been prior restraint based on the threat of violence.—Lisa Provence

Categories
News

Unprecedented activism galvanizes Charlottesville

Charlottesville is no stranger to protests. The city’s Free Speech Wall is a testament to the First Amendment and a frequent gathering spot for citizens exercising their right to assemble.

That said, we’ve never seen anything like this.

Since the election of Donald Trump as president, at least seven new groups have sprung up, and a couple of more were formed during 2016. Mayor Mike Signer declared Charlottesville the “capital of the resistance” at a January 31 rally, and it’s hard to keep up with the ongoing protests.

“I see resistance as a broad spectrum, ranging from making donations to organizations that stand for American values to joining a protest to calling a congressman to changing a friend’s mind to supporting a lawsuit to embracing a member of a vulnerable and victimized population,” says Signer.  “What’s happening in Charlottesville at this very moment encompasses this whole spectrum,” he says.

From women’s rights to immigrant rights to racial justice to health care, there’s one or more groups focusing on the issue and they’ve all come to a boil since Trump’s inauguration. And that’s on top of longstanding, local re-energized groups like Charlottesville NOW, Virginia Organizing and Legal Aid Justice Center.

The left has the bulk of the new groups, but there’s also resistance from the far, so-called “alt-right,” which many local activists call white nationalists.

“Of course this is unprecedented,” says the Center for Politics’ Larry Sabato. “But, then again, we’ve never had a president like Trump.”

Sabato says it usually takes years for opposition to build to a significant level, as it did for President Herbert Hoover once America had suffered through years of the Great Depression, or LBJ because of the Vietnam War. President Richard Nixon, who took office in January 1969, didn’t see a big anti-war rally until October of that year.

“The largest demonstrations were for civil rights in the 1960s,” says Sabato, and were not directed against any president. Also huge were the anti-war demonstrations following Nixon’s invasion of Cambodia in May 1970, he says.

“I expect that these activities will evolve as the threats evolve,” says Signer. “I’m incredibly proud to be a member of a community with so much resistance happening on so many levels.”

Who’s protesting what? Here’s C-VILLE Weekly’s guide to the resistance.—with additional reporting by Samantha Baars


Together Cville has weekly potlucks at IX Art Park. Photo by Eze Amos
Together Cville has weekly potlucks at IX Art Park. Photo by Eze Amos

Together Cville

Issue: Make sure the vulnerable in our community are safe with access to resources

Motto: Keep strong and fight together

Event: Weekly potluck on Sundays from 5:30-7pm at IX Art Park

Supporters: 670 on e-mail list; 60 to 100 at potlucks

Info: togethercville.net

Quote: “Our goal is to resist the current regime’s agenda. The promise of America is the freedom to pursue flourishing lives.”—Nathan Moore

Together Cville started the day after the election as a way of “channeling the anger and disappointment into something useful,” says Moore. The group takes a multipronged approach, he says, and is in touch with other groups. It also has produced a calendar of local activist events. And the Sunday potlucks, he says, are “rejuvenating.”


Together Cville Women’s Group

Origin: Pantsuit Nation

Issue: Meeting place to gather volunteers,
learn about protests

Event: Monthly first Saturday meeting from 4-6pm at the Friends Quaker Meeting House, 1104 Forest St.

Supporters: 200 followers on Facebook; works with other groups such as Together Cville

Quote: “I think a lot of us got to the point it was overwhelming, there were so many issues, so now we help find your passion.”—Dianne Bearinger

Bearinger, who grew up in the ’60s and has been an activist all her life, says, “I’ve never seen anything like this.” Activism “hasn’t felt like a choice to me because so much I care about is threatened.” She lists the environment and seeing rising sea levels where she grew up in New Jersey, friends in the Islamic community who feel threatened, friends
raising black sons and feeling vulnerable, and the Affordable Care Act, which Bearinger depends on for health care.


Indivisible Charlottesville members are weekly regulars at the Berkmar Crossing office of Congressman Tom Garrett. Photo by Eze Amos
Indivisible Charlottesville members are weekly regulars at the Berkmar Crossing office of Congressman Tom Garrett. Photo by Eze Amos

Indivisible Charlottesville

Origin: Indivisible Guide written by former congressional staffers

Issue: Get Congress to listen to a vocal minority

Strategy: Protest style borrows from the
Tea Party playbook

Event: Weekly Tuesday protests from noon-1:30pm at U.S. Representative Tom Garrett’s office at Berkmar Crossing, and the group held a town hall meeting February 26 without Garrett, who was in Germany

Supporters: 3,500 on Facebook; 1,600 on e-mail list; 200-250 people at weekly protests

Info: facebook.com/indivisiblecharlottesville

Quote: “We had a lot of people at the beginning who can organize and people who can volunteer 10 hours a week. We’re figuring out how to channel that volunteer energy.”—David Singerman

Indivisible Charlottesville reserved a room at the Central Library January 28, expecting 100 people might show up, says Singerman. Instead, about 500 showed up, the event moved to The Haven and “the roller coaster began,” he says. While Garrett has been a vocal Trump supporter, he isn’t the only one in Congress the group is pressuring. Virginia’s two Democratic senators have also heard from Indivisible, says Singerman. “Trump has thrown unexpected curveballs,” he says. “There won’t be any shortage of issues.”


Charlottesville Democratic Socialists of America

Inspired by: The Bern

Issues: Living wage, affordable housing,
universal health care

Strategy: Going to public meetings and
voicing opinions

Supporters: 30 to 40 at the group’s first public meeting February 15

Info: facebook.com/CvilleDSA

Quote: “It’s a political ideology focusing on the importance of social and economic equities,
collective decision-making and ownership.”—Lewis Savarese

The national Democratic Socialists of America organization started in 1982, but the socialist tradition in the U.S. goes back to the early 20th century, when Eugene Debs ran for president five times. More recently, Senator Bernie Sanders’ presidential campaign reignited interest in democratic socialism and the local group hopes to tap into that energy. “Currently the system panders to certain interest groups, like corporations,” says Savarese. “We believe we can bring more people into the political process.”


A demonstration got loud February 11 when candidate for governor Corey Stewart showed up to denounce City Council’s vote to remove the state of General Robert E. Lee from Lee Park, and members of SURJ showed up in counterprotest. Photo by Eze Amos
A demonstration got loud February 11 when candidate for governor Corey Stewart showed up to denounce City Council’s vote to remove the state of General Robert E. Lee from Lee Park, and members of SURJ showed up in counterprotest. Photo by Eze Amos

Showing Up for Racial Justice

Inspired by: Last July’s police shootings of unarmed black men Philando Castile and Alton Sterling

Issue: Getting more white people to focus on racial justice

Strategy: Mobilize quickly and use a diversity of tactics to show zero-tolerance for white supremacists

Event: SURJ members were in former Trump campaign Virginia chair/GOP gubernatorial candidate Corey Stewart’s face when he came to Charlottesville February 11 to denounce City Council’s vote to remove the General Robert E. Lee statue.

Supporters: 980 Facebook followers; 350 on e-mail list

Info: facebook.com/surjcville

Quote: “It’s white people’s job to undermine white supremacists.”—Pam Starsia

Protests are not SURJ’s only way of combating racism. The group co-sponsored a February 21 workshop on gentrification, zoning and form-based code with the local NAACP, Legal Aid Justice Center and Public Housing Association of Residents. And SURJ admonished the local media not to normalize fringe racist groups who call themselves “alt-right” without defining them as white supremacists or white nationalists.


heARTful Action

Issue: How to do the activism thing and do it in a healthy way

Event: Monthly workshops on aspects of activism and self-care on the last Saturday of the month from 3-5pm at Friends Quaker Meeting House

Supporters: 200 on Facebook; connected to Together Cville, Together Cville Women’s Group and Indivisible Charlottesville

Info: focuspocusnow.com/category/heartful-action

Quote: “It feels like this time we can’t think our way out of it. We need to feel in our bones what we want to create and that requires integration of body and mind.”—Susan McCulley

McCulley and two friends were already thinking about small workshops on art and mindfulness. “Then the election happened,” she says. HeARTful Action wants to help people navigate the new landscape in a way that is creative and mindful.


Charlottesville Gathers

Issue: Active bystander intervention

Event: Rally to support the Women’s March on Washington January 21 at IX Art Park

Supporters: The rally brought more than 2,000 pussy cap-wearing attendees

Info: facebook.com/CharlottesvilleGathers

Quote: “We intend to be a convener of training and inspirational events to equip Charlottesville and its citizens to be the capital of the resistance.”—Gail Hyder Wiley

Wiley joined up with teacher Jill Williams to organize the rally. At this point, she says it’s pretty much just her, but she’s ready to provide support to other groups.


Cville Rising

Issue: Clean energy implementation, pipelines

Current action: Working closely with Buckingham County’s Union Hill community and activist group Friends of Buckingham to prevent the construction of a noisy compressor station, which is being proposed in tandem with the Atlantic Coast Pipeline.

Allies: Friends of Nelson, Friends
of Buckingham, Friends of
Augusta, EPIC, Together Cville

Supporters: 30 frequent volunteers; 300-person e-mail list

Info: cvillerising.com

Though the group didn’t officially form until the end of last year—after the
presidential election of a man who
supports the construction of major fracked gas pipelines, though a spokesperson says it was unrelated—Cville Rising has been operating under the radar for a year and a half. Its mission is to bring awareness and connect Charlottesville to the environmental woes in surrounding counties.


Equity and Progress in Charlottesville

Inspired by: Again, Bernie

Issue: Elect local candidates to make bold changes to eliminate racial and economic
disparities

Event: Held second meeting February 27 to find and support candidates to run for office

Supporters: About 150 showed up at first meeting

Info: epiccville.org

Quote: “We aimed exclusively at local issues and changing the power relationship.”—Jeff Fogel

EPIC was already in the works before the election, but “I think the response we’ve gotten is in large part a function of the election,” says Fogel, who is the group’s first candidate and is running for commonwealth’s attorney. EPIC boasts former city officials, including former mayor Dave Norris and former councilor Dede Smith, who are ready to support candidates who traditionally haven’t been part of the political process.


Mayor Mike Signer held a rally January 31 and declared Charlottesville the capital of the resistance. Unity and Security for America’s Jason Kessler held his own vocal counter-demonstration at the same event. Photo by Eze Amos
Mayor Mike Signer held a rally January 31 and declared Charlottesville the capital of the resistance. Unity and Security for America’s Jason Kessler held his own vocal counter-demonstration at the same event. Photo by Eze Amos

Unity and Security for America

Issue: Defending Western civilization while dismantling cultural Marxism

Events: Meetings every Wednesday at 7pm at the Central Library

Supporters: At least two [Its president, Jason Kessler, did not respond to requests for information.]

Mascot: Pepe the frog

Info: usactionpac.org

Quote: “[Wes Bellamy] then proceeded to attack the Robert E. Lee monument, which is of ethnic significance to Southern white people.”—Jason Kessler

Kessler, whose claim to fame is unearthing Bellamy’s vulgar tweets and petitioning to have him removed from office because of the tweets and his call to relocate Confederate statues, has attracted statewide white heritage protectors, including former Trump state campaign manager and candidate for governor Corey Stewart.

Categories
News

Burn notice: Flag burning still inflames some

President-elect Donald Trump, known for his uncanny ability to raise eyebrows with 140 characters or less, sent out this particularly scrutinized tweet November 29: “Nobody should be allowed to burn the American flag—if they do, there must be consequences—perhaps loss of citizenship or a year in jail!”

While one Virginia man voices the same grievance, another local would like to remind The Donald about U.S. Supreme Court rulings that declared otherwise.

In two cases—one in 1989 and another in 1990—the highest court in the nation ruled that the prosecution of people who burn the flag violates the First Amendment right to free speech and is, therefore, unconstitutional, notes Joshua Wheeler, the director of Charlottesville’s Thomas Jefferson Center for the Protection of Free Expression.

“It’s a little puzzling as to why politicians of both parties try to bring this up given that it’s not such a common occurrence,” Wheeler says. But, as a result of the tweet, he adds, a number of people have burned flags outside of Trump’s New York City abode in protest.

Wheeler compares the decades-old Supreme Court decisions with the recent arrests of 13 Black Lives Matter protesters who stopped traffic on Richmond’s I-95 and were convicted on the same day Trump sent his tweet.

“Unlike flag burners, the conviction of the Richmond protesters had nothing to do with the message they were expressing,” he wrote in a statement. “Their crime was impeding traffic. Had a similar highway-blocking protest involved the Ku Klux Klan, Planned Parenthood or the NRA, all would have been equally guilty of impeding traffic—a crime of pure conduct.”

And prosecuting someone for burning a flag can get sticky, he says, asking what exactly an American flag is. “Does it include a flag patch sewn onto someone’s jacket? How about a realistic painting of the flag? Or a button displaying only the U.S. flag? If you can’t burn it, can you also not step on it? Or write on it? Such laws are unwieldy, to say the least.”

The First Amendment “doesn’t mean citizens can say whatever they want whenever they want,” Wheeler says, but it is a limit on the government’s ability to restrict free speech. And while he doesn’t think flag burning is the best way to express oneself, he says he supports the right to do it.

“I am personally offended by it,” he says. “I think it is a deliberately provocative way to express something that could be done in a more respectful way. On the other hand, I believe more strongly in the right of free speech.”

But Jonathan Guy, a Chesterfield man who comes from a long line of family members who served in the military, feels otherwise.

“I think it’s ridiculous,” he says. “People stepping on the flag and burning them is a disgrace. …I’m looking at two folded flags in my window. One was my granddad’s and one was my dad’s. I cherish those flags.”

And he’s proposed a solution to the problem.

For offenders who weren’t born in America: “Send them back to where they came from.” But for natural-born citizens: “That’s a really tough question.”

Categories
News

Campaign trail: Spy center backs off Trump sign ban

Mike Sienda already felt aggrieved when his boss at the National Ground Intelligence Center’s Rivanna Station told him in early September to not show up on grounds with his giant Trump-Pence signs on the side of his box truck.

When he was told he couldn’t park on the federal property with a smaller Trump 2016: Make America Great Again sign in the back window of his Jeep, Sienda contacted the Rutherford Institute, a local civil rights org. And within two days of its attorneys writing NGIC October 12, he was told, uh, never mind, the smaller sign is just fine.

“I think they realized it’s protected speech,” says Sienda.

The spy center had cited the Hatch Act, which prohibits federal employees from engaging in on-the-job campaigning, when it first banned Sienda’s box truck. However, the Rutherford Institute argues that the act says workers can exercise their rights “unless expressly prohibited by law,” and the regs allow bumper stickers on personal vehicles, and do not “expressly prohibit” signs over a certain size.

Sienda still hasn’t gotten the okay to bring back the bigger signs on his truck, which the Rivanna Station called a “campaign vehicle.”

“We’re going to ask them to clarify that,” says Rutherford founder John Whitehead. “If the government uses these terms, they have to define them.”

NGIC did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Sienda is happy with his partial victory. “I’m glad to be able to participate in the political process and not worry about doing anything wrong,” he says.

Categories
News

Censorship or civility? Debate about new City Council procedures rages on

City Councilor Bob Fenwick could be in big trouble. He spoke to a C-VILLE reporter recently about his concerns with new council meeting procedures and didn’t “explicitly” state it was his individual opinion and that he was not representing council, as required by the new rules.

“I really objected to this,” says Fenwick, who was the lone dissenter February 16 in the 4-1 vote. That was one clue he was not representing council when he spoke to C-VILLE. Ditto for the letter he wrote headlined “Freedom of speech or controlled speech?” that appeared in the March 6 Daily Progress.

That same issue contained an op-ed from activist Walt Heinecke—“Tightened grip undermines dissent”—criticizing new meeting procedures, as well as a letter from the four other councilors—“Efficiency of meetings will benefit public”—defending the new rules.

On March 9, local civil liberties organization the Rutherford Institute weighed in with a letter to council, challenging the constitutionality of the new rules. Rutherford letter to city council 3-09-2016

Forbidden behaviors such as “improper comments” and “disorderly conduct” are problems for Rutherford founder John Whitehead because of their vagueness. “They’re not defined,” he says. “Civility is another guise for censorship.”

He also notes that telling elected officials they can go to hell is protected speech, although council’s ban against profanity or vulgar language or gestures has been on the books since 2013.

In the section of the new procedures titled “Mayor as presiding officer,” Whitehead finds it particularly egregious that in the case of a disturbance, the mayor can order audio and visual equipment turned off, and he notes that nothing in the rule limits its application to city-owned equipment, “so by its plain terms it could be used by the mayor to stop citizens from using personal recording equipment,” he writes.

He says City Council has approved surveillance cameras on the Downtown Mall. “Why can’t we watch City Council?” asks Whitehead. “Why would the mayor shut down video equipment if there was a disturbance? Who is he protecting?”

City Attorney Craig Brown responded to Rutherford Institute allegations with a letter to City Council, and he disputes any notion that the new procedures are unconstitutional. “As you know, during the deliberation and discussion of this policy, there was never any suggestion that it would be used to restrain members of the media or the public in taking notes or making their own audio or visual recordings,” he says. city response to rutherford

Brown doesn’t address why the mayor needs kill-switch power over city-owned equipment.

When asked, Mayor Mike Signer says in an e-mail, “This was all about Council making our government as fair, accessible and effective for as many folks as possible. As our city attorney has advised, these new procedures are wholly consistent with the First Amendment and Virginia law. With that said, we should always be considering the effectiveness of all our policies, and these procedures, including the section you cite, should be no exception.”

Fenwick points out that the debate on the new policy took place at a Saturday work session attended by one citizen at which no public comment was allowed. “The public had no input on this,” he says.

Most bothersome for Fenwick, he says, are the lack of transparency and the lack of public participation in the new procedures. “Everything was done at once,” he says.

The new procedures nix councilors replying to citizen comments and direct them to defer to City Manager Maurice Jones’ responses, unless, at the discretion of the mayor, a councilor is recognized to respond to an individual public comment.

“I’m being silenced,” says Fenwick. He feels further stifled by another rule that now requires two councilors rather than one to request the removal of consent agenda items and placing them at the end of the meeting for discussion. “If I’m working against a 4-1 majority, it’s pretty clear I’ve got a tough row to hoe,” he says.

One thing Fenwick doesn’t object to: the three-minute limit on councilors’ comments to make the meetings more efficient and end by 11pm.

Brown finds “no compelling reason to recommend any amendments” to the new procedures, and says with the rare exception of those who have attempted to disrupt and hijack the meeting, speakers have enjoyed full exercise of their free speech rights. “The First Amendment does not compel City Council to conduct its meetings in a manner akin to ‘The Jerry Springer Show,’” he writes.

Whitehead disagrees with Brown’s assessment. “I’m a nationwide authority on this,” he says. “If they aren’t going to listen to a constitutional authority, who are they going to listen to?”

He says such policies are a national phenomenon “to keep citizen comment to a minimum,” and he cites James Madison, who said he wrote the First Amendment to protect the minority from the majority.

Asks Whitehead, “Do we want that or do we want a group of bureaucrats who don’t want improper comments?”

The new procedures went into effect March 7.

 Correction: Council will review the lottery sign-up procedure in six months, not the meeting procedures as a whole as originally reported. And Bob Fenwick should have been quoted as having a tough row, not road, to hoe.