Charges dropped against protesters

In the eyes of Richland County Solicitor Dan Johnson, protesting on the State House lawn is a lawful use of the grounds.

Johnson on Thursday refused to prosecute 19 Occupy Columbia protesters who were arrested Nov. 16 by the S.C. Bureau of Protective Services.

“They were there for a purpose that is a lawful purpose and that is to protest under the First Amendment,” Johnson said.

The charges were dropped Thursday in a day filled with legal wrangling over the Occupy Columbia protest and the participants’ rights to stay overnight on the State House grounds. A lawsuit filed by seven protesters against the state was moved to federal court, where U.S. District Judge Cameron Currie will preside over the case.

Gov. Nikki Haley and other defendants in the case agreed to a 15-day extension of a temporary restraining order, which allows the Occupy Columbia protesters to continue spending the night in tents on the grounds, said Butch Bowers, an attorney for Haley. The restraining order ends at 5 p.m. Dec. 15, he said. That means Currie most likely will hear the case before the order expires.

Ten of the 19 arrested attended an afternoon news conference near their tents in front of the Confederate monument to declare victory against Haley.

“Occupy Columbia has been vindicated again,” said Ashley Blewer, one of those arrested and a party in the lawsuit.

On Nov. 16, Haley ordered S.C. Bureau of Protective Services officers to arrest protesters who stayed past 6 p.m. She said the protesters who had been living on the lawn for more than month were destroying the landscape and going to the bathroom in the shrubs.

Haley’s office continued Thursday to assert those accusations.

“It’s unacceptable, and the governor disagrees with this decision,” her spokesman, Rob Godfrey, said in response to the dropped charges.

The protesters have disputed Haley’s claims that they are ruining the grounds.

“We’ve been respectful of these grounds,” said Shaw Mitchell, a protester who was arrested. “This is supposed to be the people’s house, not just the establishment’s.”

Haley cited a policy created by the State Budget and Control Board’s General Services Division as the reason for her request, and she used a state statute governing use of state property as the authority for the arrests.

The statute says it is unlawful to use the State House grounds for any purpose not authorized by law. Johnson said protesting is covered by the First Amendment. As for the Budget and Control Board’s policy, those are just guidelines and do not have the force of law, Johnson said.

“I have determined that although the officers were acting under the direction of the Governor, there is not enough evidence to prove all elements of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt,” he said in an emailed statement.

The fact that the trespassing charges were dropped has no bearing on the civil case, said Mark Schnee, a Columbia lawyer representing the Occupiers.