Civil Disobedience Without Consequences

by James A. Bacon

The anarchists who organized the UVA Encampment for Gaza are clamoring for the University of Virginia to reverse its No Trespass Order (NTO) against nursing student Mustafa Abdelhamid. The circumstances behind the sanction are absent from the brief Instagram post by the anarchist collective, but the restriction was imposed for actions relating to the Virginia State Police crackdown on the pro-Palestinian tent “encampment” on May 4.

Abdelhamid is the only arrestee whose No Trespass Appeal (NTO) appeal was denied, claims UVA Encampment for Gaza.

Even though the protester is identified as a Piedmont Virginia Community College student, Encampment for Gaza asserts that the order prohibiting him from entering UVA Grounds is “preventing him from pursuing his nursing studies. Please join our appeal by endorsing our letter and telling UVA administration to let Mustafa nurse,” says the Instagram post.

Maybe Abdelhamid should have pondered the potential consequences before doing whatever it was that he did that got him in trouble.

I suppose one could make the case that Abdelhamid had no expectation that the UVA administration would hold him accountable for anything.

UVA routinely issues NTOs for people engaging in non-political behavior. But it has made exceptions. At least five white supremacists who participated in the 2017 tiki-torch march in 2017 were slapped with NTOs.

Issuing NTOs to militant protesters just wasn’t done (unless they were affiliated with the alt-right), as I personally witnessed during a Jefferson Council event last year featuring author Abigail Shrier. Ignoring their university-issued permit to rally in the Amphitheater, more than 100 demonstrators walked up a steep flight of steps, lined the sidewalk to the speaking venue, and hurled obscenities, insults and taunts at the people walking into the building, then repeated the harassment when attendees walked back to their cars.

In a report submitted to the Board of Visitors last year, The Jefferson Council recommended that the administration issue NTOs to off-campus agitators who break the rules. While University officials did not condone the behavior, they saw no reason to sanction anyone. “The post-event review strongly suggests … that these were not University students who were present during the walk toward the garage, based on our investigators’ familiarity with some of them,” university officials stated in their response to our report.

It seems that UVA President Jim Ryan has had a change of heart. When defending his decision to crack down on the pro-Gaza encampment, which violated University rules regarding the erection and placement of tents, he noted that civil disobedience has a long and honored tradition in American history. Demonstrators broke the law knowing they could and would be arrested and charged. The willingness to accept punishment, he said, gave their actions moral force. 

Moreover, if the anarchists’ Instagram posts are to be believed, tent protesters are subject not just to punishment by local courts but also to University sanctions.

“How is UVA helping us heal?” whines one post. “Administration sends arrested students to disciplinary trials and withholds their degree [and] arrested staff are being required to write apology letters.”

Charlottesville’s militants want civil disobedience without consequences. It is heartening to see that the administration is enforcing the rules and holding students accountable for their behavior.

In related news, the anarchist collective tried to stir up trouble in Charlottesville’s high schools, calling for a student walkout Friday. “The student movement continues,” the group proclaimed. “The people united will never be defeated.”

The post has generated 279 likes, so it appears that some members of the community are sympathetic. However, the high school walkout did not generate enough participation to warrant media attention.

I did like one response to the anarchists’ Instagram post, though: “Disgusting. Bad enough adults don’t know what they’re talking about but you’re dragging kids into it also??? And thinking a high school march out is going to do anything???”

James A. Bacon is contributing editor to The Jefferson Council.


ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)




Comments


Comments

61 responses to “Civil Disobedience Without Consequences”

  1. Rafaelo Avatar
    Rafaelo

    “One who breaks an unjust law must do so openly, lovingly, and with a willingness to accept the penalty.” — Martin Luther King, Letter from a Birmingham Jail, 16 April 1963.

  2. Wahoo'74 Avatar
    Wahoo'74

    Great article Jim. Actions have consequences, at least they should.

    The tiki torch racists were rightfully sanctioned. Everyone agrees with that. Mustafa will need to understand that he too must pay the price.

    I’m sure Iranian nursing schools would welcome him with open arms if he wants to complete his degree.

    1. William O'Keefe Avatar
      William O'Keefe

      It is a great article and it is refreshing to see that the UVA leadership may now understand that appeasement doesn’t work.
      If UVA is going to have rules, they need to be enforced.

      1. Turbocohen Avatar
        Turbocohen

        With rules enforced the way UVA leadership enforces rules, who needs rules? At the same token, with friends like campus protestors that support Hamas, who needs enemies?

  3. Eric the half a troll Avatar
    Eric the half a troll

    TJC is back to its “anarchists” pejorative…. with a few “militants” thrown in for good measure…

    1. Eric the half a troll Avatar
      Eric the half a troll

      Peaceful protestors … oh, but the tents!… 😱

      1. Lefty665 Avatar
        Lefty665

        Curious that pitching a tent negates the Bill of Rights and the right to assemble and petition.

        1. Wahoo'74 Avatar
          Wahoo'74

          It’s in violation of the UVA regulation to pitch a tent on the Lawn or in front of the Rotunda. It’s not a summer camp or state park. It’s a UNESCO World Heritage site.

          1. Wahoo'74 Avatar
            Wahoo'74

            Can’t argue with that. No, not violent but just in violation of existing regulations. I would have chosen different words.

          2. Lefty665 Avatar
            Lefty665

            So freedom of speech and assembly are god given rights until some bureaucrat at UVa decides he/she/it does not like tents on the lawn?

            Doesn’t seem like much of a right if that’s the way it works. Somehow it seems likely our founders had a little broader vision than that.

            How do you suppose the conversation went? Something like “Look Tom, yeah, yeah, we’re endowed by our creator with inalienable rights including speech and assembly, unless of course 200 years from now the grass at that school in the boondocks that’s naught but a gleam in your eye gets designated a UNESCO World Heritage site. Then all bets are off.”

            Doesn’t seem like the kind of issue that would drive a revolution.

        2. Marty Chapman Avatar
          Marty Chapman

          Lefty, we were doing so well! Are the UVa regulations that were allegedly violated reasonable restrictions on the time, place, and manner of assemblies? I would guess they are, but the C-Ville and perhaps US District Court will likely have a say.

          1. Lefty665 Avatar
            Lefty665

            We were, and we can again.

            I’m struggling with the 1st Amendment and it’s limits. Hoping that talking about it on BR will help me sort it out.

            I’m pretty much a 1st Amendment absolutest. That’s for all speech, not just for speech I like, and I’m not fond of some of what we’ve been hearing.

            It is hard for me to see how a local reg can trump a Constitutional right. On the other hand there can be restrictions on assembly and speech.

            How do those things balance?

          2. f/k/a_tmtfairfax Avatar
            f/k/a_tmtfairfax

            I too lean toward being a 1st Amendment absolutist. But there are permissible restrictions as to time, place and manner.

            Even the ACLU recognizes this. https://www.aclu.org/know-your-rights/protesters-rights

            Taking over a college plaza with tents crosses the line. Ditto for blocking traffic or obstructing entrance to a public building.

          3. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            could they put up canopies instead?

          4. f/k/a_tmtfairfax Avatar
            f/k/a_tmtfairfax

            Not without permission. They could march up and down the sidewalks within a college (assuming there are public streets and sidewalks), subject to the need to keep safe paths for people not involved in the demonstration. They could probably maintain a quiet, all-night vigil but no tents or sleeping bags without permission. Seems very understandable to me.

          5. Lefty665 Avatar
            Lefty665

            I hear you, but still don’t understand what makes assembling by standing different from standing with a tent?

            It seems a pretty trivial distinction that abolishes a fundamental right. What is so special about pitching a tent that it trumps the 1st Amendment?

            If a tent crosses the line, how about a chair? Could you loose your right to assemble because you brought a chair?

            That the first amendment could be so fragile is scary to me. The unpopularity of some of the current speech seems to be in the driver’s seat. That is a slippery slope, but one George III thoroughly endorsed, that our forefathers were willing to fight a war over, and those we honor on this Memorial Day died for.

            Tomorrow maybe your cap’s the wrong color, no free speech or assembly for you bucko. Once we legitimize restrictions, what is restricted is simply a policy revision.

            “Congress shall make no law… abridging the freedom of speech… or the right of the people to peaceably assemble…” That is clear and unambiguous.

            Help please, what is so extraordinary that it makes a restriction of assembly and speech “reasonable”, and why?

          6. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            could they maintain a presence 24/7 without disruption just take turns at shifts?

          7. f/k/a_tmtfairfax Avatar
            f/k/a_tmtfairfax

            So long as it didn’t cause disruption or present a safety risk (say standing on a dark road), I would think a 24/7 quiet protest is protected speech.

          8. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            we agree. Even if it is in support of the Palestinian people and others claim it’s the same as pro-Hamas?

      2. Eric the half a troll Avatar
        Eric the half a troll

        Tents make The Jefferson Council tense apparently…

        1. Nancy Naive Avatar
          Nancy Naive

          An incident at a carnival perhaps?

          Does pitching a tent rise to the same free speech symbolism as, oh say, burning a flag?

          For some reason, pitching tents have brought down the wrath of authority since Anacostia Flats.

          1. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            I agree. Don’t think it is tent though but “encampment” though not violent and not anarchists… just plain old garden variety protestors for a cause.

          2. f/k/a_tmtfairfax Avatar
            f/k/a_tmtfairfax

            I guess one could try to get a permit from the public institution to pitch tents.

          3. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            Don’t need a permit to burn a flag… or a Draft card.

          4. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            Don’t need a permit to burn a flag… or a Draft card.

          5. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            yeah, but you’ll rile up the curmudgeons…

          6. f/k/a_tmtfairfax Avatar
            f/k/a_tmtfairfax

            But you do need one to pitch a tent. What happens when a person pitches a tent in a campground that requires a permit to camp? I get tossed out if I’m just camping but am left alone if I say I’m protesting the price of camping permits???

          7. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            Private? Or public? I doubt seriously if you went to the public park and pitched a tent if anyone would bother you. The parks are all “closed at sunset”. It’s not the tent, you see, it’s the dark.

          8. Lefty665 Avatar
            Lefty665

            Glad to see you guys are pursuing it, but I’m not sure I yet understand why pitching a tent overpowers the god given rights of speech and assembly.

          9. Lefty665 Avatar
            Lefty665

            Some of those folks overcame in the ’60s Some of us in the ’70s built on that, although outcomes varied in Ohio.

            Between the city denying the Alt Right permits to assemble and UVa breaking up assembly over tents, it appears no one in Charlottesville holds the Bill of Rights in very high regard. Old TJ would be disappointed but perhaps not surprised.

          10. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            Apparently mentioning Jim Crow ain’t legal around these parts.

          11. CJBova Avatar

            No, NN. Take your choice:
            “No wandering way off topic. Stick to the topics raised in the post or logical offshoots of those topics.
            ” No snark. Well, exceptionally witty snark might be given special dispensation, but routine, run-of-the-mill snark will be deleted.”

          12. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            Snark? There was no snark in that. It was a perfectly sound reason to Lefty’s “ Glad to see you guys are pursuing it, but I’m not sure I yet understand why pitching a tent overpowers the god given rights of speech and assembly.”

            Jim Crow explained all.

          13. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            Snark? There was no snark in that. It was a perfectly sound reason to Lefty’s “ Glad to see you guys are pursuing it, but I’m not sure I yet understand why pitching a tent overpowers the god given rights of speech and assembly.”

            Jim Crow explained all.

          14. CJBova Avatar

            Not really…ad you apparently forget the rest of what you said included snark.

          15. CJBova Avatar

            No.Snark is in how it’s presented. I wouldn’t have called it snark had you included the link the first time.

          16. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            So, now the obvious and common knowledge needs links?

            Thomas has always compared Jim Crow to its remediations as being equivalent. The Samaritan and the highwaymen are complicit.

          17. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            Most campgrounds are pretty regimented. First, you can only camp at a designated site that you have reserved and are paying for – and many of them limit staying there at 2 weeks.

            You certainly cannot put a tent anywhere you want …

            HOWEVER, it appears that homeless people CAN pitch a tent in a public place for extended periods of time and the courts are now weighing in on it.

    2. Nancy Naive Avatar
      Nancy Naive

      Because “civil disobeyer” doesn’t carry the same sense of urgency when labeling an other as an other.

  4. Kathleen Smith Avatar
    Kathleen Smith

    Although I don’t disagree, it brings back good and bad memories. I appreciate the young standing up for something. I really didn’t think they had it in them. I remember during the first Iraq war going to Asheville, a very Bohemian town, and wanting to join a group of women protesting the war. They were being carted off by police (carrying each) at dusk when the City square closed. My daughter who was about 25 at the time was absolutely horrified that I wanted to join. I was very disappointed in her. 🥲

    1. LarrytheG Avatar
      LarrytheG

      You know all of that for a fact or are you getting “news” from selective sources?

      1. Nancy Naive Avatar
        Nancy Naive

        What fact?

        1. LarrytheG Avatar
          LarrytheG

          response to something that was deleted from “Bedford Boy”.. you can guess…

  5. CJBova Avatar

    Let’s keep comments on topic or closely related.
    If anyone wants to engage in a discussion on a topic not directly related to a posted article, write it up and send to Jim Bacon.
    Moderation is going to be tighter on snark and off topic meandering.

  6. LarrytheG Avatar
    LarrytheG

    If you’re gonna do sanctions for violating UVA policy (and I don’t disagree with their right to do that), it’s important that it be applied uniformly across the board, no exceptions.

    The message gets sent. Sanctions levied/consequences of any/all who violated the policy, and everyone knows and behaves accordingly.

    It’s when this is not done – that sanctions are not consistent that things can go sideways with further actions and claims of unfair treatment, and some will then seek to push the envelope again and further. UVA needs to quickly apply the same sanctions each and every time and then people know the consequences and can make their choices without a complaint about selective treatment.

    Consistency is important these affairs IMO but it does not mean the protestors will quit, either. If they believe
    strongly in their cause, they will continue. There will just have to be ground rules that will be consistent and enforced.

    My point of view……..

    1. Nancy Naive Avatar
      Nancy Naive

      We are talking about just UVa, right? Nothing closer to home?

      1. LarrytheG Avatar
        LarrytheG

        more than UVA, yes. set a rule. enforce it uniformly and don’t cause “churn”.

    2. VaPragamtist Avatar
      VaPragamtist

      Without knowing more details, it’s hard to say that the policy wasn’t applied uniformly.

      It appears the policy distinguished between students, employees, and outsiders for both issuing and appealing NTOs:
      https://uvapolicy.virginia.edu/policy/PRM-018

      Was the individual a UVA using student, or a PVCC nursing student who, through an agreement with UVA, has/had the opportunity for clinical experience through UVA Medical Center:
      https://www.pvcc.edu/news/2021/10/01/pvcc-announces-nursing-program-expansion-partnership-uva-medical-center

      Did he go through the appropriate appeal process (which can be different, depending on who issued the NTO to the students and employees)?

      1. LarrytheG Avatar
        LarrytheG

        yup.

      2. LarrytheG Avatar
        LarrytheG

        nothing is ever simple… 😉

  7. Nancy Naive Avatar
    Nancy Naive

    Somebody proud of this one. Comments scrubbed and all clean and shiny.

    “Maybe Abdelhamid should have pondered the potential consequences before doing whatever it was that he did that got him in trouble.”

    So you don’t know, probably don’t care, but seem okay with a punishment being meted out because…

    Hmm, one must ponder? Could it be his name?

    1. LarrytheG Avatar
      LarrytheG

      him and none of the others?
      rhyme or reason in sanctions?

      yep… someone took an axe to the comments…

  8. Nancy Naive Avatar
    Nancy Naive

    Freedom is hammered out on the anvil of discussion, dissent, and debate. -Hubert Humphrey, US Vice President (27 May 1911-1978)

  9. Eric the half a troll Avatar
    Eric the half a troll

    Just leaving this here… a displaced persons encampment…

    https://x.com/leila_ma/status/1794851494107267261?s=46

  10. Only if he works for Unwra in Rahfa…. walk the walk buttercup

  11. Turbocohen Avatar
    Turbocohen

    Israel uses weapons to protect people.
    Hamas uses people to protect weapons.
    The Rafah lie has been exposed, explosive laden Hamas vehicles blew up killing most of the civilians. You wont hear UVA faculty or students saying the truth because it interferes with UVA anarchists plans.

    1. LarrytheG Avatar
      LarrytheG

      The Viet Cong, Taliban, Isis did the same thing, right?

      1. Turbocohen Avatar
        Turbocohen

        Pick your friends

        1. LarrytheG Avatar
          LarrytheG

          …”explosive laden Hamas vehicles blew up killing most of the civilians..”

          really?

        2. Lefty665 Avatar
          Lefty665

          And with friends like war criminals Israel, who needs enemies?

Leave a Reply


ADVERTISEMENT