On July 22, 2026 three federal judges in the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta – Chief Judge William Pryor, Judge Jill Pryor and Judge Andrew Brasher – heard oral arguments in the appeal of the 2024 unconstitutional conspiracy conviction of the Uhuru 3.

A Tampa jury had acquitted 84-year-old veteran African liberation fighter Chairman Omali Yeshitela and two white reparations organizers Penny Hess and Jesse Nevel of serving as secret agents of Russia, but contradictorily convicted them on the secondary false charge of conspiracy to be secret agents of Russia – all because they had expressed opinions opposing the U.S. support for Ukraine along with advocating for reparations to African people and charging the U.S. with genocide in its treatment of Black people.

This precedent-setting anti-colonial free speech fightback has won international and national support from First Amendment defenders and social justice activists from across the political spectrum, including the National Lawyers Guild, the Civil Liberties Defense Center, the National Conference of Black Lawyers, the Center for Political Innovation, the U.S. Peace Council, U.S. Hands Off Cuba Committee, former NYC Councilman Charles Barron, Dr. Cornel West, Jimmy Dore, Max Blumenthal, Dr. Gerald Horne and Tucker Carlson.

Trending

How Young Children Learn by Going Outside

During the 2024 trial, the Uhuru 3’s legal team convinced the jury that the opinions expressed by Yeshitela were his own and not directed by the Russian government by showing print and video evidence of Yeshitela’s activism spanning decades.

Chairman Omali’s published writings, showing a consistent worldview of African Internationalism and anti-colonialism, can be read in 58 years of The Burning Spear newspaper, freely available in the University of Florida’s digital newspaper collection.

In the past five decades he has traveled to seventeen countries to speak to audiences, including in 2019 as the winning presenter at the Oxford Union’s “Africa Debate”. He has been interviewed and featured on platforms such as CNN, Democracy Now, Al Mayadeen, Press TV and countless national and international radio stations, podcasts and newspapers.

The DOJ had argued that the Uhuru 3 are engaged in spreading disinformation “even if the information is true but it makes the government look bad.”

In their earlier Motion to Dismiss, attorneys for the Uhuru 3 argued, “The government here is using a federal criminal statute to prosecute members of an activist group for political speech and activism in opposition to U.S. foreign policy. In so doing, this prosecution strikes at the heart of the First Amendment.”

“This is the first case in which the government has used the statute that criminalizes unregistered foreign agents (18 USC §951) to target political or dissenting speech. In short, if this case is allowed to go forward, it will reverse more than eight decades of Supreme Court precedent that prohibits the government from targeting dissenting political speech and dissent.”

The appeal of the Uhuru 3’s false conviction on the lesser charge of conspiracy was filed a year ago on June 16, 2025. It argues three points, that:

1. The lower court’s finding that lawful political speech loses its First Amendment protections when the speaker is alleged to be a Russian agent, should be reversed.
2. The government presented insufficient evidence of a conspiracy as it presented no evidence, as conceded by the government’s own case agents, that the APSP defendants 1) acted or agreed to act under the direction or control of Ioniv or the AGMR, or 2) knew of the registration requirement, essential elements of a conspiracy.
3. The jury was misled to believe that it could convict the defendants on the conspiracy charge despite the absence of evidence as to the underlying crime.

More than 80 Uhuru 3 supporters packed the Atlanta courtroom again on July 22, spilling into an overflow room where attendees watched the proceedings on closed circuit TV.

Notable figures attending the hearing included Attorney Mawuli Davis, National Co-Chair of the National Coalition of Black Lawyers; Belinda Parker Brown of Louisiana United International; Efia Nwangaza, veteran of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC) and Malcolm X Center for Self-Determination; John McCarthy of the Center for Political Innovation; Mark Friedman of the U.S. Hands off Cuba Committee and Paulette Dauteuil of the Jericho Movement and Leonard Peltier Ad Hoc Defense Committee.

Not a “content neutral” prosecution

The oral argument hearing took less than thirty minutes. Uhuru 3 Attorney Leonard Goodman began: “This is a novel case. It’s the first time that Section 951 has been used to directly target speech. The indictment does not allege that any of these defendants conspired to commit espionage or destroy property. Rather the indictment charges a conspiracy to disseminate pro-Russian political speech, which is described in the indictment as Russian “propaganda and disinformation”.

Chief Judge Pryor interjected, “This indictment seems to be necessarily to implicate speech, but the real question is whether the offense, that is, the failure to register for acting as an agent of a foreign government, is content neutral? It seems to me that it is. It may be that the speech activities on behalf of that foreign state would be evidence that you are an agent that hasn’t registered.

He went on to ask, “imagine for me a hypothetical where the individual was acting as an agent on behalf of the state of Israel and was advocating the attack on Iran, which the United States government was involved in as well and was supportive of the United States activities as well. It seems to me that would be an offense under this statute in that situation just as much as in this situation.”

Attorney Goodman tried to expose the fallacy of “content neutrality” by citing the think tanks in Washington D.C. that receive millions of dollars from U.S. allies who are not indicted as unregistered foreign agents, but he was cut off by the judges.

Some court observers were concerned that the judges’ comments appeared to favor the prosecution. But speaking to reporters as the Uhuru 3 and supporters emerged from the Atlanta Federal Courthouse, Chairman Omali said, “The court recognized there are some issues that need resolution. Attorney Leonard Goodman did an extraordinary job. The prosecution did not have a reasonable explanation about why we were facing conspiracy charges when the jury had found us not guilty on the foundational charge.”

He went on to say, “Nobody in this country has a connection to the struggle for free speech more than Black people. When the Bill of Rights was adopted in 1791, African people were property. We had no rights. There was no assumption it was for us. This is what I’m hoping that, particularly white people, would come to understand. When they came for us around free speech issues that we never had, it’s not us they’re coming for, they’re coming for you. They’re coming for everyone.”

Chairman Yeshitela’s lawyer, Attorney Ade Griffin declared, “We’re here today to change the law for generations to come. And that’s an extremely hard thing to do.”

At the Debrief

Uhuru 3 supporters then walked to the nearby Georgia State University College of Law for a debrief discussion forum and lunch co-sponsored by the Black Law Students Association and the Davis Bozeman Johnson Law group.

Attorney Leonard Goodman shared his reflections on the hearing. “When federal prosecutors want to prosecute some poor old lady for a drug conspiracy because her son was selling drugs in the house and she was ignoring the signs, they ask for what’s called an ‘ostrich instruction’ which is you can’t put your head in the sand and not see what’s going on around you.

“Well, it should have been applied to the judges as well because it was a little shocking to hear them suggest that we are going to find that this was a content-neutral prosecution. ‘We weren’t going after these people because they are pro-Russia and it just so happens that we raided their home three months after Russia invaded Ukraine and Omali started giving speeches saying we shouldn’t be fueling this war by sending bombs to Ukraine. It’s just a coincidence.’”

“President Trump took how many millions from Miriam Adelson, a dual citizen, who was born in Israel and a direct quid pro quo. And I say this as an American Jew, bar mitzvah’d in Chicago. If the decision goes against us, we’ll be filing a petition for rehearing and if that’s denied we will go to the Supreme Court.”

Angela Reaney agreed, “If we lose today, it just means that we have an opportunity to make a bigger impact in the Supreme Court.”

Attorney Mutaqee Akbar, legal counsel for Uhuru 3 member Jesse Nevel, is the son of legendary African psychologist Na’im Akbar. He agreed that, “It’s clear that you all were targeted because of what you were saying. But the same doesn’t apply when people advocate on behalf of Israel. Think about AIPAC. They don’t say the same thing when people advocate for other European nations that go along with what the United States says, that go along with colonialism. It’s only when you speak against what this government says you shouldn’t speak against. The fact that it’s not right just means we need to keep fighting. The struggle continues.”

Chairman Omali discussed the vanguard role of the African anti-colonial struggle in keeping democratic space open for everyone. “It was not the struggle against facism that destroyed McCarthyism or kept society open. It was the struggle of Black people against colonialism that kept the society open.”

Some supporters who attended the court hearing expressed frustration and asked why the judges were allowed to interrupt and take up the time that was supposed to be allotted to the defense lawyers.

Attorney Goodman replied, “They have the power. We don’t.”

Chairman Yeshitela added, “Yet.”

More info at www.handsoffuhuru.org

The post Fed court to decide landmark First Amendment case appeared first on Chicago Defender.

Based on reporting by Chicago Defender.

Post News Group

Posts by Post News Group