The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
Accused Salman Rushdie Stabber Also Charged with Support for Hezbollah
From a Justice Department press release; Matar is also awaiting trial for attempted murder in New York state court:
A grand jury returned a three-count indictment charging Hadi Matar, 26, of Fairview, New Jersey, with attempting to provide material support to Hizbollah, a designated foreign terrorist organization, engaging in an act of terrorism transcending national boundaries and providing material support to terrorists.
"We allege that in attempting to murder Salman Rushdie in New York in 2022, Hadi Matar committed an act of terrorism in the name of Hizbollah, a designated terrorist organization aligned with the Iranian regime," said Attorney General Merrick B. Garland. "The Justice Department will prosecute those who perpetrate violence in the name of terrorist groups and undermine the basic freedoms enshrined in our Constitution." …
According to the court documents and statements made by the government in court, between September 2020 and August 2022, Matar, attempted to provide material support and resources to Hizbollah, a designated foreign terrorist organization. Matar did this by attempting to carry out a fatwa calling for the execution of Salman Rushdie, which Matar understood was endorsed by Hizbollah.
The indictment further alleges that Matar attempted to kill and did in fact assault Rushdie. Matar was motivated, in part, by a 2006 speech given by Hizbollah Secretary General Hassan Nasrallah, in which Nasrallah endorsed the fatwa calling for Rushdie's death, which was originally issued in 1989….
An indictment is merely an allegation. All defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.
The indictment itself is here.
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
The government wants to seize his PlayStation 4.
Much as I'd like to see this animal hanged, these charges have an Orwellian feel.
I agree -- I'd much rather see the USA charge him with crossing a state line to commit a felony (or whatever its called) -- he lives in NJ and you gotta cross a state line to get to Buffalo from there.
Besides, what's the material difference between stabbing Rushdie because of a fatwa and because of a dispute over a faulty car? Or something stupid involving a girl.
Is Rushdie any less sliced & diced?
Now what's missing in all of this is the indictment of Hizbollah Secretary General Hassan Nasrallah, and either asking the International Kangaroo Court to arrest him or considering it an act of war and bombing Hizbollah.
Besides, what’s the material difference between stabbing Rushdie because of a fatwa and because of a dispute over a faulty car? Or something stupid involving a girl.
Because killing someone because an Imam told you to is more disruptive of social order than the the other examples. Hizbollah is a terrorist organization that calls for killing people. Tolerating that leads to a lot more killing. There is no organization that calls to kill people over a car or a girl.
Same reason why a mafia hit is worse than a random killing over a car or girl.
Killing someone because an Imam told you to isn't the thing that's genuinely disruptive, though. What's really disruptive is not going after the Imam, so he can keep putting out contracts on people.
Thank You Jimmy Carter.
It's not free speech?
No. "Go kill X" is not free speech.
Next Question.
I have to say, attempting to kill someone because an Imam told you, however wrongful, isn’t necessarily providing specific support to an identified foreign organization. The summary of the charges doesn’t seem to allege enough facts to really demonstrate beyond a reasonable doubt that he was intending to aid Hezbolla specifically as opposed to taking some sort of general, non-organization-specific vengence against perceived blasphemy of Mohammed and Islam. A lot of people besides Hezbolla supported the fatwa. The connection to Hezbolla specifically seems tenuous.
He may well not be guilty of the specific allegations. And by making attention-grabbing charges as distinct from more boring charges that are more clearly supported by the evidence, the Justice Department might not have picked the best legal as distinct from political strategy.
"The summary of the charges doesn’t seem to allege enough facts to really demonstrate beyond a reasonable doubt that he was intending to aid Hezbolla specifically as opposed to taking some sort of general, non-organization-specific vengence against perceived blasphemy of Mohammed and Islam. "
"Beyond a reasonable doubt" is for trial, not an indictment. We may yet see more evidence.
See SimonP’s comment below. I wrote it that way in case the SimonPs of this world decided to pounce on the apparent hypocracy.
Perhaps I should say that I agree there is likely probable cause. But usually an indictment in a publicized case alleges enough facts to make it clear, if the feds can back it up, that the guy is guilty. This one didn’t strike me as doing so. Yes, there is probable cause. Yes, there might be testimony later in the trial showing a clearer connection to Hamas and shoring the case up.
But usually when the feds have specific smoking-gun type facts, they will say so in the indictment.
They didn’t here.
Could also be that by giving three charges, they let the jury be "moderate" by only convicting on one or two. That, coupled with state charges, should be enough to throw him away for life.
Max on state charges is 25 years and DA wants max.
Was there some doubt?
Hezbollah is bad for being Iran's cat's paw and killing a great many Israelis, and Americans too, over the course of years. Hamas meanwhile, another of Iran's Islamist cat's paws, and also responsible for killing a great many Israelis and Americans, isn't so bad that it hasn't been advocated for by Harvard students, faculty and staff.
Does Rushdie's book detail the evidence that will be used to connect the perp to Hezbollah?
Yes, this is more in line with what I was expecting to see in this thread.
I was confused, at first, to see a VC commenter expressing doubt about charging this guy for providing material support to a terrorist organization by acting on a fatwa that the organization also happened to endorse. Given the willingness of MAGA to paint any utterance of support for innocent Palestinians being killed by Israel as essentially "pro-Hamas" - and indeed, given a couple of VC contributors' posts attempting to draw this exact link - I had expected more support in the comments for throwing the book at this guy.
Narked! Fell right into the trap.
Notice how “beyond a reasonable doubt,” the standard for criminal conviction, was specifically mentioned. The OC never once suggested there wasn’t probable cause, the standard for legitimately accusing someone, or even preponderance of the evidence, the standard for a civil case.
If you want to make a convincing argument, paying attention to details helps. If you want to convince people you know your subject, don’t screw up on basics.
It might be best not to be so glib next time.
They should then tie material support to a non-zero dollar value so they can then get him on non-reporting and taxes.
What? You don't pay taxes for giving money to other people. (Unless you're the other people's employer.)
You most certainly do. Look up Gift tax.
You're supposed ot be a lawyer? What a joke
Who do you think pays that tax?
And why are you coming in so hot?
The person giving the gift does, in fact, pay the gift tax. Of course, gift taxes don't apply to services directly provided - only cash and assets -so it's a silly idea.
I think the gift giver pays it, Who do you think pays, it , ignoramus?
The gift tax doesn't come into play until one has exceeded the lifetime exemption of $13 million — and not counting any annual gifts under (now) $18,000. And also, it doesn't apply to providing services.
Your ignorant claims was "you don’t pay taxes for giving money to other people. " Nothing about services, no caveat about exemptions (set to sunset next year).
keep digging.
“trial for murder”
Um, I think you mean trial for _attempted_ murder.
Do they give Nobel Prizes for attempted chemistry?
Whether somebody is dead or not sounds like a question for the jury to me!
Or did the little darling also kill someone else, too?
Whoops, yes, thanks -- fixed.
Too bad NY got rid of their Electric Chair
NO -- better he rot in the SuperMax than make a Martyr out of him.
Dead Arabs rot alot faster.
Have you noticed that they can't take hostages to gain the release of terrorists who you've already executed?
Rushdie's book Knife about the attack and aftermath is recommended.
BTW, "Matar has already pleaded not guilty to state charges of second-degree attempted murder and second-degree assault in connection with the stabbing."
https://www.cbs58.com/news/man-accused-of-stabbing-author-salman-rushdie-pleads-not-guilty-to-federal-terrorism-related-counts-lawyer-says