agingrebel.com
The Mongol Nation forfeiture
verdict last week, in which a dozen ordinary men and women in suburban
Los Angeles, were convinced by a pair of scalawag prosecutors to forbid
members of the Mongols Motorcycle Club from wearing what they want to
wear, was far from the final word on the subject.
Given the technical complexity of the
legal issues inherent to the case – like, for example, the fine points
of conspiracy, the capacity of an abstract entity to feel guilt and RICO
“distinctness” – it is probable that nobody thinks the verdict was good
law that should now be followed in every court everywhere.
Fat Lady Remains Silent
The legality of the verdict is now up to
the presiding judge, the formidable and widely respected David O.
Carter. On February 28, Carter will hold a hearing on both the propriety
of the guilty verdict the jury returned against “Mongol Nation” in
December and the forfeiture verdict the jury returned last week.
As difficult as it is for people in a
hurry or on deadline to understand, nothing will really be decided until
sometime after Carter holds his motion hearing. At this point it looks
like the government has scored a huge propaganda victory but lost the
case.
Amicus Briefs
Mongol Nation is now entirely in Carter’s hands. He has the job of making a momentous decision with wide ranging implications. Today, in a proceeding in his chambers that is unlikely to be widely noticed, Carter solicited legal advice.
He issued an “Amicus Invitation” that invited “interested members of the public” to submit amicus curiae briefs” discussing three legal issues.
The Latin phrase refers to a “friend of the court” who is not a party
to a case but who, out of the goodness of his heart, shares his
expertise or insight into that case in the form of a brief.
The issues are:
“Whether criminal forfeiture of any and
all legal and equitable rights of any kind or nature associated with or
appurtenant to a collective membership mark violates the First Amendment
to the United States Constitution.”
“Whether forfeiture of a collective membership mark is feasible under intellectual property law.”
“Whether an unincorporated association is legally capable of committing the crimes of murder and/or attempted murder.”
This might be an appropriate time for
the American Civil Liberties Union and for various lawyers who
unabashedly describe themselves as “Biker Rights Attorneys” to step up.
