SC Progressive Network

Below is background on SC Progressive Network Director Brett Bursey’s arrest in October 2002 and subsequent trials over his refusal to retreat to a “free speech zone” during a fund raising visit of President George W. Bush in Columbia. The case is headed back to court in Charleston on Oct. 27, 2008, to examine evidence that was suppressed during his trial in 2003. Bursey is the only person ever convicted under a federal statute that allows the Secret Service to create a secure zone around presidential events.

•••••••••

Network Director Brett Bursey had a hearing in federal court Aug. 28, 2003, on a motion to compel the government to release documents in his case. Brett has been charged with threatening the president for refusing to go to a “free speech zone” last October when Bush came to Columbia.

The judge granted the discovery motion and ordered the Secret Service and the Justice Department to provide all documents to him by Sept. 2. If the judge determines that something in the evidence relates to the establishment of free speech zones, restricted areas or Brett, he will give it to the defense.

The government argued that this information is classified on national security grounds. The judge agreed to an exparte meeting with the Secret Service to determine if the SS thinks anything he wants to give Brett compromises the president’s security.

The Judge set a date for the trial for Wed. Nov. 12. in the new federal courthouse on Richland St.

Listen to the story about Bursey’s case on All Things Considered on the National Public Radio, July 25 (you need Realplayer to hear the story). Printed transcript here.

On May 27, 11 members of the US Congress wrote to Attorney General John Ashcroft demanding that he drop the federal charges against Bursey (click here to see letter)

Article in Sunday April 27 New York Times on Bursey’s arrest for threatening the President with sign that read, “NO WAR for OIL.”

•••••••••••••

A note from Brett:
The trial is finally over and we hope that the judge will agree that we won. We won’t know until he rules the second week in December. We were able to put on our case that the Secret Service has shown a pattern of using “free speech zones” to keep protesters out of sight of the president. We were also able to get in the fact that at the Nov. 10 Bush fundraiser in Greenville, we convinced the city police not to have a free speech zone, and the protesters were able to go almost to the front door of the venue and to get withing several hundred feet of the president’s limo when it arrived. The bottom line is that it is unconstitutional to treat protesters differently than the general public. We will be working with groups across the country to help them resist being put in the zone. Thanks to all the people who gave such strong and heartfelt support during this ordeal, especially attorneys Lewis Pitts and Rauch Wise. Also special mention needs to go to Mat Painter in Washingto DC who successfuly served a subpoena on John Ashcroft and tried to serve Karl Rove at the White House; and to Bar Blackman in Columbia who served subpoenas on six different kinds of cops and the Chairman of the Republican Party. Let’s keep up the fight to make America a free speech zone!

For democracy,
Brett Bursey

•••••••

Federal Magistrate Bristow Marchant will hold a public session of court at 2pm, January 6 to announce the verdict in Brett Bursey’s federal trial. Bursey faces six months in prison and a $5,000 fine for refusing to go to a “free speech zone” during a visit to Columbia by President Bush Oct. 2002.

People are encourged to attend and show their support for free speech. The new federal courthouse is at 901 Richland St. Parking available at city parking building Richland and Assembly.

Brett Bursey was convicted Jan. 6 in federal court of refusing to leave a restricted area and go to a free speech zone. Bursey, who faced 6 months in prison and a $5,000 fine, was fined $500. “We are appealing,” Bursey said, “because this establishes the bad legal precident that the Secret Service has no limits on the size of restricted zones they establish around the president.” The restricted zone when Bursey was arrested was over 70 acres and stretched for a mile.

Lewis Pitts, Bursey’s lead attorney said, “We are dismayed that the judiciary failed in its role of keeping the executive branch of our government operating within constitutional boundaries. We we made the case that Mr. Bursey was not arrested because he was a threat to the president’s physical security, but because the White House has a policy of keeping protesters out of sight at Mr. Bush’s appearances. I’m sure we would have won if we had a jury.”

“We believe that it is important that we appeal, because the ever increasing size of the sanitized areas around the president make a mockery of the first amendment,” Bursey said.

SC Free Speech Case Heard in Fourth Circuit Appeals Court

Calling the case “an uncommonly silly prosecution by the government,” Judge Diana Gribbon Motz today admonished the South Carolina lawyer prosecuting a protester arrested during President Bush’s visit to Columbia in October 2002.

The three-judge panel heard arguments in the case against Brett Bursey, who was originally charged with trespassing on public property in a crowd of ticket-holders to the president’s fundraiser at the airport. Five months later those charges were dropped, but federal charges were levied not long after against Bursey for violating the statute governing “presidential assassinations, kidnappings and threats.” This followed Bursey’s refusal to retreat with his “No War for Oil” sign to a “Free Speech Zone” a half-mile away.

The charges alleged, and the lower courts agreed, that Bursey “knowingly and willfully entered into, and refused to leave, an area secured by the Secret Service” and upheld a $500 fine. Bursey has argued that he was arrested for trespassing on public property and was never told that was in a federally restricted area.

“The Secret Service has been enforcing the law in favor of those who support the President while keeping those who oppose the administration’s policies away from the President as well as the media,” said Jeff Fogel, Bursey’s attorney and Legal Director of the Center for Constitutional Rights in New York.

Co-counsel Lewis Pitts said, “The significance of this case is that, if upheld, it will give the Secret Service legal cover for their presently unconstitutional practice of insuring that presidential protesters are out of sight.”

An opinion likely will not be rendered months. If they lose in the Fourth Circuit, Bursey and his attorneys said that they will appeal to the US Supreme Court.

•••••••

Fourth Circuit Rules against Free Speech

Network Director Brett Bursey said he will take his case to the U.S. Supreme Court after the US Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals on July 25 upheld a lower court’s conviction. “We are disappointed but not surprised by the ruling,” Bursey said. “Unfortunately, the court was bound by statements made by the prosecution on the record that are factually incorrect. While we know a hearing before the Supreme Court is a long shot, we think the implications of this case are serious and worth fighting.”

At a hearing held on May 27 in Richmond, US Fourth Circuit Court of Appeal Judge Diana Gribbon Motz called the case of US v. Bursey “an uncommonly silly prosecution.” Motz was the Chief Judge of the three-judge panel hearing arguments in federal criminal charges against Bursey, arrested nearly five months after a peaceful protest against President Bush’s foreign policies.

Bursey was arrested on local charges of trespassing in October 2002 at a Republican-sponsored rally for Bush in Columbia. Bursey refused to take his “No War for Oil” sign to a “free speech zone” a half mile away from the presidential visit.

Local charges were dropped and shortly afterwards, in April 2003, federal charges for violating the statute governing Presidential Assassinations, Kidnappings and Threats were brought against Bursey.

The charges alleged, and the lower courts agreed, that Bursey “knowingly and willfully entered into, and refused to leave, an area secured by the Secret Service” and upheld a $500 fine. Bursey has argued that, “I was arrested for trespassing on public property, and was never told that was in a federally restricted area.”

Jeff Fogel, one of Bursey’s attorneys and lead council for the Center for Constitutional Rights, answered questions from the judges about how the 100 acre restricted area was established and enforced. Fogel summed up his presentation, saying that “the Secret Service has been discriminately enforcing the law in favor of those who support the President and keeping those who oppose the President away from the President and the media.”

“Mr. Bursey could not have violated the statute,” said Bursey’s other attorney, Lewis Pitts, “because the secure area was never established according to the law, and Mr. Bursey didn’t have a clue that he was violating a federal statute.”

“The significance of this case,” Pitts said, “is that if upheld, it will give the Secret Service legal cover for their presently unconstitutional practice of insuring that presidential protesters are out of sight.”

•••••••••••

Supreme Court refuses case: Fight to keep America a Free Speech Zone

Today the US Supreme Court declined to hear Brett Bursey’s appeal of his Free Speech case, ending a four-year legal battle that began when he refused to go to a “free speech zone” while protesting President Bush’s visit to Columbia in 2002. Bursey is the Director of the South Carolina Progressive Network, an 11-year-old coalition of organizations and individuals.

Bursey was holding a sign that said “No more war for oil, don’t invade Iraq” when he was told to go to a distant “free speech zone” or be arrested on local charges of trespassing. “I told the police that I was in a free speech zone called the United States of America,” Bursey said.

The trespassing charges were dismissed four months after the arrest, and the Secret Service immediately brought federal charges.

Bursey is the first and only person to ever be prosecuted under the federal statute that governs Threats to the President. After being refused a jury trial, he was convicted and given a $500 fine.

Bursey still owes thousands of dollars for taking the case to the Supreme Court, and also now must pay the $500 fine. “As this ruling limits everyone’s free speech, I am looking for 499 other Americans who are as angry as I am over the loss of constitutional rights under George Bush to join me at the federal court house and pay a dollar each.” Bursey said he will announce a date to join him in paying the fine.

Bursey’s attorney, Lewis Pitts, said today, “This case is a microcosm of the debates raging now about the the executive branch of government and President Bush’s refusal to obey the law and the intent of Congress.”

The statute requires that secure areas be clearly marked and entrance restricted. Secret Service and State Law Enforcement Agents acknowledged that there were other people in the area when Bursey was arrested and trial testimony made it clear that the area was not restricted according to the law.

“The courts allowed the Secret Service to pick Mr. Bursey out of a crowd because he was opposed to the President’s pending war with Iraq,” Pitts said. “This is a disturbing precedent that will limit the First Amendment rights of all Americans.”

Substantiating Pitt’s fear, SC Secret Service Director Neal Dolan said in Charleston last year, “If Bursey’s prosecution holds, we have another dozen cases” across the country.

“I’m outraged that the courts have allowed the Secret Service to play fast and loose with the law,” Bursey said. The court opinions cited “this age of suicide bombers” and the need for “flexibility” in giving latitude to the Secret Service to not follow the statute. “Unless we continue to exercise and fight for our rights, the Secret Service will assume the legal authority to create huge, unmarked restricted zones around the president, insuring that those opposed to the president’s policies will be kept out of sight.”

At his sentencing, Bursey told the court, “I may lose the battle today over the restricted area, but I believe we will win the fight to keep America a free speech zone.” Today Bursey reiterated, “The fight for free speech and the rule of law does not end with this ruling; it must intensify, or we will soon not recognize our own country.”

Thank you to the nearly 200 people who stood in line on Jan. 24, 2006 at the US Courthouse and the 185 who mailed in their dollar(s)! It was a powerful statement about the rising cost of free speech. With your help, we raised over $1000 to pay Network Director Brett Bursey’s federal fine and legal expenses for refusing to go to the “free speech zone.”

Contributions to the Free Speech Fund can be made by clicking here “Donate Now” or by calling 800-849-1803.

•••••••••

To hear an audio recording of Bursey’s statements during sentencing in 2003, click here.

•••••••••

Download Free Speech Manual: What to do When Bush Comes to Town.

•••••••••

Free Speech v. George Bush: Final Showdown

Can the White House restrict the First Amendment based on political considerations? This will be the central question at a Federal Court hearing in Charleston, SC, 10am on Oct. 27.

The hearing on a Writ of Coram Nobis, translated as “the error before us,” filed by Brett Bursey, will examine evidence suppressed at his trial in November 2003. A coram nobis petition applies to persons who have already been convicted and have served their sentence. Such motions cannot be used to address issues of law previously ruled upon by the court, but only to address errors of fact that were not known at trial or were knowingly withheld from judges and defendants by prosecutors that might have altered the verdict were they presented at trial. The writ argues that the government withheld evidence of White House involvement in segregating peaceful protestors from supporters of President Bush at presidential rallies. Bursey was arrested at a Bush rally in Columbia in October 2002 for refusing to be segregated from the general public.

Bursey, Director of the SC Progressive Network, is the only person ever convicted under a federal statute that allows the Secret Service to create a secure zone around presidential events. Bursey was arrested on state charges of trespass at an appearance of President Bush when he refused to go to an obscure “free speech zone” a half-mile away from the event. Four months after the arrest, state charges were found unconstitutional and dismissed. Federal charges were then brought by US Attorney Strom Thurmond Jr. under the statute that governs “Presidential Assassination, Kidnapping and Assault” (Title 18, United States Code, Section 1751(a)(1)(ii)).

“I argued at my trial that the Secret Service was being used as an armed political advance team by the president to keep protesters out of sight of the venue and the media,” Bursey said. He filed discovery motions and subpoenas during his trial for any White House directives to the Secret Service, but the government successfully moved to deny his efforts, calling them a “fishing expedition.”

Bursey has since discovered the White House Advance Manual that instructs the Secret Service to do what he alleged the agents had done. “There are several ways the advance person can prepare a site to minimize demonstrators,” the manual reads. “First, as always, work with the Secret Service and have them ask the local police department to designate a protest area where demonstrators can be placed, preferable not in view of the event site or the motorcade route” (pg. 32, Presidential Advance Manual).

Bursey was convicted of standing on the side of the road, 200 yards from the event, with a sign that read: No More Wars For Oil. His attorneys will argue that the White House and the Secret Service worked in concert with local police to deny the First Amendment rights of those opposed to the Bush Administration’s policies.

Bursey’s lead attorney, Michael Tigar, will be assisted by trial attorneys Lewis Pitts and Rauch Wise, Bursey’s trial counsel, and Columbia attorney Joyce Cheeks.

A member of the Duke University Law School faculty, Tigar is one of America’s leading constitutional lawyers. Justice William J. Brennan has written that Tigar’s “tireless striving for justice stretches his arms towards perfection.” In 1999, the California Attorneys for Criminal Justice held a ballot for “Lawyer of the Century.” Tigar was ranked third, behind Clarence Darrow and Thurgood Marshall.

Tigar is author or editor of more than a dozen books. He has also written three plays and dozens of law review articles. Tigar has represented The Washington Post, John Connally, Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, Scott McClellan, Rep. Ronald Dellums, Mobil Oil, Fernando Chavez, Lynne Stewart, Angela Davis and Terry Lynn Nichols. He has tried cases in many courts across the country, and argued seven cases in the U.S. Supreme Court, as well as dozens of federal appeals.

************

Click here to read the story on the hearing that ran in The Post and Courier Nov. 2, 2008