Journalist Charged With Hate Crime for Covering Gaza Protest

In an egregious violation of press freedoms and First Amendment-protected activity, a New York City video journalist was arrested on felony hate crime charges Tuesday for allegedly being present during and documenting a pro-Palestine protest action.

According to the charges, Sam Seligson, a credentialed independent videographer, filmed a small group of people last June graffitiing the homes of the Brooklyn Museum’s director, president, and two other museum officials with pro-Palestine, anti-Zionist slogans.

Spray-painted messages and banners hung on the properties accused the museum leaders of complicity in Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza. A week prior, the museum had called in police to mass arrest protesters who had assembled inside its building to demand divestment from holdings related to Israel’s war.

No one is suggesting that graffitiing private property is legal under New York law. Seligson is not accused of spray-painting or vandalizing any property. He is nonetheless facing charges for criminal mischief enhanced as a felony hate crime; one other person alleged to have driven participants to and from the executives’ homes is also facing criminal mischief hate crime charges. The police are still looking for four alleged participants.

That a participant in the graffiti action would face criminal mischief charges comes as no surprise. To categorize the acts as a felony hate crime is, however, itself a troubling overreach.

The home of Brooklyn Museum director, Anne Pasternak, was not targeted because she is Jewish but because of the museum leadership’s treatment of Gaza solidarity protesters. The other homes targeted did not belong to Jewish people.

Even those who might disagree with the nature of the tactics cannot reasonably claim that the action was targeting individuals for being Jewish. The targets were the homes of individuals in leadership roles in an institution that has been a site of antiwar protest.

To suggest the Brooklyn Museum’s ties to Israel and its military–industrial complex somehow confer Jewish identity on the institution’s executives is a particularly offensive version of the common, pernicious conflation of anti-Zionism with antisemitism.

The reasons behind it, however, are clear. The hate crime charge is among countless repressive efforts to treat Palestinian solidarity as de facto antisemitic, and thus turn it into de jure antisemitism.

The hate crime enhancement is bad enough. Applying the overreaching hate crime charges to a journalist covering the incident is beyond troubling; it is an outrage. It is not alleged that he participated in the graffiti. He is accused of merely traveling with the participants and being present to document their activities.

“If he is being charged for being transported by these people to document the event, that’s not a crime, that’s journalism” said Robert Balin, an attorney who has represented photojournalists arrested by the NYPD during the George Floyd uprisings. Balin stressed that it’s possible that more relevant information could emerge to complicate the story, “but if the facts are as they are being portrayed, which is that he did not actually participate in the underlying events, bringing felony charges against him is very, very concerning.”

At this point, the prosecution has not even proven that Seligson was present, and Seligson and his attorney did not comment on whether he was.

However, he would not be the first video journalist to accompany individuals engaging in unlawful political or other activities, such as graffitiing private property, for documentary purposes.

A law enforcement official, speaking anonymously to The Associated Press, admitted that Seligson was not directly involved in the spray-painting or property damage. Therefore, it is clear that he is being charged solely for documenting the act.

Seligson’s attorney, Leena Widdi, argued that the criminal complaint against the journalist does not accuse him of any specific behavior other than his presence, which is consistent with his role as a journalist documenting protests or other activities.

The charges against Seligson could have a chilling effect on journalistic activity, as the mere observation of an unlawful incident could potentially lead to criminal prosecution for journalists. This sets a dangerous precedent that threatens freedom of the press.

The hate crime charges against Seligson are based on spurious grounds, as the symbol used in the vandalism is not inherently antisemitic. The Manhattan District Attorney’s Office’s justification for the hate crime charges is questionable.

Under the First Amendment, Fifth Amendment, and New York Shield Law, journalists are not obligated to share information with law enforcement about the participants in events they cover, even if those events involve unlawful conduct.

Seligson’s arrest and the excessive charges against him could set a coercive precedent for journalists, potentially undermining press freedom. Please provide a different version.

Source link