Not rising for the judge "a path to chaos and violence"

[KBCraig]

http://www.twincities.com/localnews/ci_21436605/rise-judge-its-religious-freedom-says-somali-defendant

Allowing a Muslim woman to remain seated when a federal judge enters a courtroom is a path to chaos and violence, a federal prosecutor warns.

In a legal brief filed this week, Assistant U.S. Attorney Jeffrey Paulsen told Minnesota's chief federal judge that the government has a keen interest in whether Amina Farah Ali sits or stands when court is called into session -- and that the need for order in the court trumps her religious beliefs.

The Rochester woman, convicted last year of raising money for the terror group al-Shabaab in her native Somalia, evokes "strong emotions" in the state's Somali community, Paulsen wrote to U.S. District Judge Michael Davis.

"The potential for those strong emotions to boil over into disorder or even violence in the courtroom cannot be discounted," the prosecutor warned. "Granting Ali an exemption from one of the most basic court rules of decorum would have undermined the government's compelling interest in courtroom order and security."

On Sept. 18, Davis will hear arguments on what he should do about Ali's refusal to stand during a pretrial hearing and the first two days of her trial last year.

Davis told her he'd find her in contempt if she didn't stand. All told, he did so 20 times, and told her she'd spend five days in jail for each one.

But in June, the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals threw out 19 of the 20 contempt citations, saying Ali's refusal "was rooted in her sincerely held religious beliefs."

The appeals court told Davis he had a duty under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 to find a way to accommodate her religious beliefs.

The court said the gist of Davis' ultimatum to Ali to violate her religious beliefs or face jail "substantially burdens the free exercise of religion."

Davis was ordered to reconsider his actions and "reach a balance between maintaining order and avoiding unnecessary and substantial burdens on sincere religious practices."

Davis' punishment of Ali stands in contrast to another federal judge's handling of so-called "American Taliban" John Walker Lindh last week in Indianapolis.

Lindh, serving 20 years for fighting for the Taliban, is contesting limits on his religious practices at the federal prison in Terre Haute, Ind. At the first day of a hearing in his suit, he did not rise when U.S. District Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson entered the courtroom.

The judge made no mention of it and took no action. When a federal prosecutor asked Lindh why he didn't stand, he replied that standing for people was "against my religion."

That is the same reason Ali, 36, gave Davis last year during her trial for conspiracy. She cited an Islamic teaching attributed to the Prophet Muhammad in which he told a group of people they were not to stand as a show of respect to him.

Ali reasoned that if she wasn't to stand for the prophet who founded her religion, it was wrong to stand for a federal judge.

Davis, as well as Ali's co-defendant, Hawo Mohamed Hassan, 65, took a different view. The judge told Ali that the "rising requirement" was a matter of court decorum and order and was directed to the court system in general and not the judge in particular. He ordered her to jail.

After two nights behind bars, and after consulting with Muslim elders, Ali changed her mind.

The two women were convicted of conspiring to raise money for al-Shabaab, a group fighting the United Nations-backed government in Somalia. Such fundraising became illegal in February 2008 when the State Department declared al-Shabaab a Foreign Terrorist Organization.

Ali also was found guilty on 12 counts of providing support, while Hassan was convicted on two counts of lying to the FBI.

No sentencing date has been set. Each could face 30 years in prison.

Davis ordered both sides to provide legal briefs suggesting what he should do about Ali's lone remaining contempt citation. They were filed Tuesday, Aug. 28.

In the government's brief, Paulsen said the requirement to stand contributes to the functioning of the court. Nobody should be excused from standing, he said.

"To the contrary, making exception to the rising requirement for the very people who already may be predisposed to question the court's authority, such as criminal defendants, would undermine the purpose of the rising requirement, erode the court's authority, and embolden non-risers to further challenge the authority of the court," the prosecutor wrote.

If Ali were allowed to remain seated when the judge entered or left, "it is entirely possible that her many sympathizers in the courtroom would have begun to emulate her in a show of support," he wrote.

That could lead to more trouble, Paulsen predicted.

"Moreover, allowing a defendant to 'passively' show disrespect for the court by remaining seated may encourage increasingly more active signs of disrespect: turning one's chair around, facial gestures, hand gestures, etc., which can quickly lead to a loss of control in the courtroom," the brief said.

But defense attorney Daniel Scott wrote in his memorandum that Ali caused no commotion, did nothing disrespectful and didn't "engage in any theatrics to gain attention to herself."

"When offered a chance to explain her actions she politely told the court of her religious objection, making clear that she had no intention of disrupting the proceedings or to show any disrespect for the court personally or as an institution," Scott wrote.

He rejected the notion that failing to stand was disruptive, writing that the practice was traditional and had nothing to do "with the orderly operation of a court session."

Scott wrote that rising for a judge is a symbolic gesture and that it was wrong to force Ali to abandon her religious beliefs in order to abide by it.

"It is the teaching of the Constitution and the Supreme Court that coercion cannot be used to force such speech whether orally or symbolically," Scott wrote.

[Tom Sawyer]

Perhaps being defined as a "Super Lawyer" Assistant U.S. Attorney Jeffrey Paulsen , has inflated his feeling of self-importance.

In the government's brief, Paulsen said the requirement to stand contributes to the functioning of the court...
"To the contrary, making exception to the rising requirement for the very people who already may be predisposed to question the court's authority, such as criminal defendants, would undermine the purpose of the rising requirement, erode the court's authority, and embolden non-risers to further challenge the authority of the court," the prosecutor wrote.

If Ali were allowed to remain seated when the judge entered or left, "it is entirely possible that her many sympathizers in the courtroom would have begun to emulate her in a show of support," he wrote.

That could lead to more trouble, Paulsen predicted.

Seems it's not enough they can drag you in front of their "court" you must give them the "sanction of the victim".

[Jim Johnson]

What could the practical purpose be for standing for the judge?

And what is the safety concern is mitigated by standing for the judge?

[Tom Sawyer]

What could the practical purpose be for standing for the judge?

And what is the safety concern is mitigated by standing for the judge?

Why the radicalization of the Serfs, Johnson. Next thing you know people won't refer to the robed bully as "your Honor".

"Can't be too careful, we better make it illegal for the Serfs to step on our shadow or look us in the eye. Jim Crow was right!"

[KBCraig]

The judge told Ali that the "rising requirement" was a matter of court decorum and order and was directed to the court system in general and not the judge in particular. He ordered her to jail.

See? It's not about the judge, it's just the "court system in general and not the judge in particular". Even though somehow it's only when the judge enters or leaves that we're told to rise for the "court system in general", and it's only the judge who can throw us in jail.

[Russell Kanning]

Maybe soon we will be required to bow to the prosecuted. The federal attorney in Waco sure thought he was much superior to me.

[firecracker joe]

  What he was'nt?

[Russell Kanning]

Haha
I guess he WS since he had the power to put me back in the cage