Last February, the Israeli ambassador to the United Nations, Michael Oren, went to the University of California at Irvine to speak.  It was controversial, as the Muslim Student Union took issue with Israeli policies.  No surprise there.  Regardless of one’s position, there is little doubt that others will disagree.

A group of Muslim students made a decision, that they would engage in a concerted protest against Israel by standing up during the speech, yell a slogan expressing their political opposition to Israel’s policies, and peacefully walk out, into the waiting arms of police.  There would be no violence, no chaos.  But they would seize the opportunity, with Oren standing there, to state their opposition.

It was a principled protest.  These students believed in their cause and purpose.  They realized they would suffer some form of sanction for the actions, particularly since it was seen as a serious breach of academic etiquette to disrupt an invited speaker.  Indeed, UC Irvine founding Dean, Edwin Chermerinsky, whose liberal passions are legend, refused to recognize the free speech of the protesters trumping the free speech of the Israeli ambassador.

The nature of protest being what it is, the school was not happy about the students’ decision to protest, and disruption of the event.  No doubt the students expected as much and were prepared to face the consequences.  Perhaps they would have to endure a stern talking-to by Dean Chermerinsky.  Maybe suspension and picking up trash around the campus.  While they might have hoped that the school would perceive their effort as akin to the peaceful resistance offered by Martin Luther King, they must have realized that there was a very good chance that no day would be named after them.

What they did not anticipate, however, was that Orange County District Attorney Tony Rackauckas would see the actions of the Irvine 11 as an opportunity to strike a blow for America by prosecuting these students for the felony of conspiring to commit a misdemeanor.  Apparently, in Orange County it’s a crime for Muslim’s to interrupt.

During an NPR Interview, Dean Chermerinsky denounced the prosecution.

Dean Chemerinsky’s position is that the students didn’t have a first amendment right to disrupt the speech, but that criminal charges aren’t warranted.  UCI had already taken disciplinary action against the disruptive students and suspended the Muslim Student Union for the fall 2010 quarter.  The MSU is also serving two years of probation.

Typical of the academic mindset, they can’t understand why what happens in Vegas UC Irvine doesn’t stay in UC Irvine.  The problem, it appears, is that the outside world doesn’t seem to respect the walls around academia, much like a parent and wayward child, or angry spouse.  Publicly complain, and darn if there’s a public reaction. 

The LA Times, similarly, condemns the protest.

The behavior of the students was wrong. They could have held up signs or distributed leaflets or chanted slogans outside the lecture hall, but they should not have tried to shut down the event by making it impossible for Oren to speak. Protesters have the right to voice their objections in many ways, but not to silence those they disagree with. This principle is especially important at a university, which exists, in part, to promote the free exchange of ideas.

You know, protest all you want, but do it nicely, in a way the doesn’t annoy anybody.  Everybody enjoys a nice, orderly protest.  While the point is well taken, that silencing speech in the name of speech reflects an inherent contradiction, it misses the point of protest.  UC Irvine didn’t invite the Muslim Student Union to take a seat on stage and offer a rebuttal following Oren’s talk.  When you elevate one side of a political controversy to preferred status, does it surprise that the other side turns to more extreme measures to have its voice heard?

Yet the times, like Chermerinsky, condemns the prosecution as well.

Criminal charges, however, are not appropriate. They would be overkill, a punishment out of proportion to the offense. Is it really necessary to threaten the futures of students who engaged in a nonviolent protest that didn’t, ultimately, stop Oren from delivering his remarks? These students have been punished already, in an effort to make clear the difference between legitimate protest and their unacceptable actions. We hope they’ve learned a lesson. Now it’s time to move on.

Definitely inappropriate.  Clearly overkill.  But those aren’t words that ring well in the criminal justice system.  There is no motion to dismiss inappropriate charges.  Instead, district attorneys are elected with the implicit understanding that they will exercise discretion to reflect the sensibilities of their constituents.  Not all their constituents are holed up in the Ivory Tower.

But there is a “harder” argument to be made against the prosecution of the Irvine 11, notwithstanding their flagrant breach of academic etiquette.  Prosecutor’s don’t indict students for interrupting speeches on campus, or intervene in such parochial matters.  Except, perhaps, when the protestors are Muslim and the speaker is the Israeli Ambassador?  

This smacks of the selective prosecution of Muslim students because, well, we hate Muslims for blowing up the Twin Towers, the USS Cole and a couple of embassies in East Africa.  How many chances does the Orange County DA get to strike a blow for American against Muslims?  Carpe Islam.

Caveat: This post is not about whether Israel is right in its treatment of Palestinians or settlement policy.  Do not post comments expressing your view that the Irvine 11 are wrong, dumb, ugly or dress funny, or that Michael Oren is the front man for an oppressive Zionist regime.  The underlying politics has nothing to do with the fact that there are two sides (actually, more) to this very controversial issue, and that the Irvine 11 protestors reflect a side that strongly opposed the policies of the nation Oren represents.  I don’t happen to agree with Irvine 11’s position, but I fully understand their desire to have their position recognized.  Leave it at that.

It’s not that the Irvine 11 get a free pass at consequences for their actions.  If they want to proudly wear the mantle of Martin Luther King, they need to remember that he was a regular at the Birmingham jail.  King was willing to pay the price of his convictions (pun required).  That’s how nonviolent protest works.

And so does disapproval of prosecution for such protests, when the only group worthy of prosecution for engaging in disruptive speech just happens to be a bunch of Muslim students.

If Tony Rackauckas was a speech martinet, prosecution disrupters without regard to their views or religion, maybe he could be forgiven for inappropriate emphasis on the Irvine 11.  By singling out these Muslim students for prosecution, however, he’s just another opportunist trying to squeeze some All-American political juice out of them.  Selective prosecution, however, is unAmerican, even when “red-blooded” Americans bristle at the content of their character.