by Matthew Holloway | Jun 8, 2025 | News
By Matthew Holloway |
Arizona’s federal immigration court in Phoenix became off-limits to anti-immigration enforcement protestors and journalists covering them on May 21st when private security ordered them off the property. On May 28th, the Phoenix Police Department issued another warning to the protestors that they could be criminally cited for trespassing. The situation in Arizona is unique for the activists seeking to disrupt deportations because the Federal Immigration Court in Phoenix is located in a privately-owned office building.
Journalists covering the legal proceedings themselves are permitted inside the court as one would normally expect. However, the anti-ICE radicals who have sought to disrupt immigration proceedings in cities across the country, and the reporters following in their wake, are stymied by the newly installed “No Trespassing” signs and ropes to bar them from the private property.
The outlet reported Friday that activist groups and ASU’s First Amendment Clinic (FAC) expressed that the legal situation for protestors and reporters is unclear. Gregg Leslie, executive director of FAC explained, “Right now, it’s not all that clear because of the oddity of how this is all managed. Where the government’s rights take over versus the landlord’s rights, versus the other tenants’ rights.”
He added that the public “right of access,” exists largely as a function of whether a location is on publicly owned land or private land. This is complicated by the courtroom’s location on the third floor of a privately owned building. “If it’s private land owned for public access, there are certain allowances for there being greater public access to it,” he told the outlet.
The protests and subsequent restrictions came following a series of arrests on May 20th and 21st which found dozens of illegal aliens arrested after immigration charges against them were dismissed. Protestors gathered in front of the building chanted “No More ICE!” among other slogans including Spanish profanity. At least one protestor allegedly attempted to pull off an officer’s face covering.
Matthew Holloway is a senior reporter for AZ Free News. Follow him on X for his latest stories, or email tips to Matthew@azfreenews.com.
by Corinne Murdock | Feb 21, 2024 | Education, News
By Corinne Murdock |
An Arizona State University (ASU) professor is among the 38 law professors petitioning the Department of Justice (DOJ) for the release of Wikileaks founder Julian Assange.
ASU law professor Gregg Leslie and 37 other professors submitted their petition days ahead of Tuesday’s hearing on Assange’s extradition from the U.K. Should the court deny his request to block his extradition, Assange will be taken to the U.S. to face 17 espionage charges over his 2010 publication of classified materials.
Among the leaked materials were footage of a 2007 airstrike in Baghdad revealing that soldiers shot 18 civilians from a helicopter, including a Reuters journalist and his assistant; nearly 391,900 Iraq War logs spanning 2004 to 2009; and the “Cablegate” files consisting of diplomatic cables revealing U.S. espionage against the United Nations and other world leaders, tensions with allies, and corruption in other countries.
The DOJ accused Assange of working with former Army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning to obtain classified information. The DOJ charged Assange with espionage in 2019, alleging that he used Manning to secure certain sets of classified Secret documents: about 90,000 Afghanistan war-related significant activity reports, 400,000 Iraq war-related significant activities reports, 800 Guantanamo Bay detainee assessment briefs, and 250,000 State Department cables.
In 2020, the DOJ issued a second superseding indictment broadening the scope of the charges to include allegations that Assange recruited computer hackers to benefit Wikileaks. The indictment cited an alleged unauthorized access to a government computer system of a NATO country in 2010, and a contract with a hacking group to obtain materials from the CIA, NSA, or New York Times.
Last week’s letter from the 38 law professors made the case that Assange qualified as a journalist and, therefore, the First Amendment protected Assange’s actions. The law professors countered that Wikileaks’ openness to receiving information didn’t qualify as Assange recruiting sources or soliciting confidential documents
“Award-winning journalists everywhere also regularly ‘recruit’ and speak with sources, use encrypted or anonymous communications channels, receive and accept confidential information, ask questions to sources about it, and publish it,” said the professors. “That is not a crime — it’s investigative journalism. As long as they don’t participate in their source’s illegality, their conduct is entitled to the full protection of the First Amendment.”
The law professors further warned that Assange’s prosecution served as an “existential threat” to the First Amendment and would, in time, enable the prosecution of other reporters. They cited the police raid of a local Kansas newspaper that occurred last August based on verbal allegations of identity theft.
“It could enable prosecution of routine newsgathering under any number of ambiguous laws and untested legal theories,” said the professors.
In that case, a disgruntled local restaurant owner had told the city council and the county attorney — the brother-in-law of the hotel owner housing her restaurant — that the local newspaper had illegally obtained documentation of an unresolved DUI charge that proved she had been driving without a valid license for over a decade. At the time, the newspaper had also been investigating claims of sexual misconduct by the police chief. Within days, the police conducted their unlawful raid. The newspaper had obtained the documentation legally through public records.
Similarly, editors and publishers of a number of news outlets, including The New York Times and The Guardian, argued that Assange engaged in journalism by obtaining and disclosing sensitive information for the public interest.
In a 2019 press release announcing Assange’s charges, the DOJ dismissed the claim that Assange qualified as a journalist.
“Julian Assange is no journalist. This is made plain by the totality of his conduct as alleged in the indictment — i.e., his conspiring with and assisting a security clearance holder to acquire classified information, and his publishing the names of human sources,” stated the DOJ.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
