Chicago Seven

By. Anonymous

As America began to enter post WWII society, America entered another war against communism. One way Americans combatted this was through containment of communism, meaning they didn’t want communism to spread any more than it had. Wanting to spread democracy, Americans sent troops to overthrow the communist leader in Vietnam who threatened Vietnam democracy. As America became more engrossed in the Vietnam matter, more American troops were sent there to fight. However, as coming out of a world war, Americans didn’t want to be in a war that they weren't directly threatened by. As the anti-war sentiment increased, a specific political group of America, generally grouped as the New Left began anti-war riots across the nation. The New Left were a group concerned with social and civil rights reform and wanted the government to engage more internal reforms as well. As the anti-war riots increased so did government opposition against them. One protest in particular, held outside of the Democratic Convention of 1968 landed 8 New Left activists in court for conspiring against the government. Although the New Left’s perspectives gained a larger audience, the Chicago Seven trial failed to create significant legal reforms and caused a further division in society as more perspectives emerged during the 1960s to early 200s. 

The Chicago Seven trial allowed for the New Left activists to create a bigger platform and share their ideas. During the trial the defendants demonstrated comical exertion such as wearing judicial robes into the courtroom, doing headstands, blowing kisses  during the trial as well as referring to Judge Hoffman with disrespectful names such as fascist pig. These types of peculiar behaviors quickly captured the attention of the media and the nation. Although recordings and audios of the trial was strictly forbidden, the popularity it had outside the court encouraged reports and artists to go into the trial and record what they could with words and drawing. Newspapers such as the New York Times covered the Chicago Seven trial during the original and the appeal trial. During New York Time’s February issue, they dedicated a column to write about the disrespectful but theatrical action of two of the defendants showing up to court wearing judicial robes to mock Judge Hoffman. During the trial, reporters covered updates on what was going on with the trial showing how the New Left successfully captured media attention. Their unusual actions in court to mock the government allowed them to use the media to become more well known through newspapers. The Chicago Seven had succeeded in pulling in viewers into their case, even years after their original case closed, as they appealed in different courts, the viewers followed them into a new courtroom refusing to abandon an old story that had stirred up satire in the courtroom. This sentiment remained years after so that in a journal article an author claimed that the Chicago Seven trial was a political theater. The author claimed that the seven had engaged the onlookers not only with their political arguments but also with physical actions to engage their viewers. The abounding media attention allowed for the court case to be called a political theater years after the trial. The trial captured enough interest and attention for it to be remembered as a political theater. After the trial the members of the Chicago 7 continued to use their fame of the trial to advocate their voices. Bobby Seal continued to speak at college campuses throughout the nation, Hoffman continued his activism through tours and writing. Not only were they able to successfully continue to speak publicly about their beliefs, many of them wrote and published books about their famous trial, writing their title involving the Chicago Seven and building off of their trial. For example, Lee Weiner’s autobiography was titled “Conspiracy to Riot; The Life of Times of One of the Chicago 7”.  Although Weiner was a minor character as he was one of the two defendants who escaped conviction by Hoffman by not creating a large disorder, his autobiography still included the Chicago 7 as it was his peak of when he had the most attention. Throughout the book even though a large portion of it was about the Chicago 7, Weiner builds off the stories about being in the Chicago 7 to talk about his own beliefs and political beliefs. His use of the name Chicago 7, years after it actually happened to write about his political views demonstrates how members of the Chicago 7 gained enough fame from the case to become well known and build off of that fame continuously. The incredible amount of media coverage that the trial allowed for the case to become well known along with the New Left ideals that were entangled with the trial, during and after the case. 

The Chicago Seven trial created more social division among the different groups of people who believed various things during that time. In the early stages of the trial, Bobby Seale, the only leader of Black Panthers and Black American on trial, requested to represent himself in court when his lawyer fell ill. However, Judge Hoffman, a conservative judge who was at odds with the idea of the Black Panthers failed to let Seale peacefully represent himself. Seale ended up getting gagged and bound to a chair during the trial in order to remain his own spokesperson. Ultimately, Judge Hoffman quickly kicked him off into a different case for outrageous comments. The public showed empathy towards Bobby and started a ‘free bobby’ movement. Americans realized that Seale’s rights were being held down during the trial and advocated for a more fair trial as an American citizen. The court’s harsh retaliation towards Seale due to his race started a public reaction against the court. This continued to federal government America’s division between the American Americans of America and the government. The rest of the members raised conflict in society as well. With a lot of media coverage, there came supporters and opposers for the Chicago Seven. For instance, in Howard Brodie’s drawing of Judge Hoffman during the trial, the public was exposed to a judge who seemed very stern and had it out for the defendants by the way he was pointing at the fedents and the creases in his face. He looked irritated with the defendants rather than an impartial judge to grant Americans liberty. On the other hand artists such as Jules Feiffer portrayed Abbie Hoffman, one of the defendants, as an unserious and mischievous man by drawing clouds over him and drawing Hoffman with an eye roll. Viewers who saw Brodie’s drawing might defend the defendants against the seemingly unfair judge, while viewers of Feiffer’s drawings would defend the judge against a disrespectful and disruptive defendant in court. These different points of view of the defendants and the judge showed the varying perspectives that emerged from the case.  Contrasting perspectives caused a further divided society between the supporters of Chicago Seven and supporters of Judge Hoffman. Due to the Chicago Seven and Judge Hoffman’s own political stance on the liberal and conservative spectrum, the trial further divided the conservatives and liberals. Despite this the liberal side of the case wasn’t as united as it seemed. The defendants themselves were from different political parties and had different agendas in mind. In a photograph, the seven members of the trial along with their lawyer were lined up and took photos of, all displaying various clothing items. Some wore their hair out long and had looser clothing like the Yippies, while the more old fashioned liberals had more neat pleats and well cut hair. Their political ideals and beliefs reflected upon their clothing was shown through the photograph, demonstrating how different every member of the seven had various beliefs and wouldn’t have been at the same place unless they had been part of the trial. This division was further expressed during an interview with Lee Weiner, a member of the Chicago Seven where he claimed there was conflict between them as they shared different political views. For example, Tom Hayden, a more old liberal member of the Chicago 7 viewed Abbie Hoffman and other Yippie’s comical tactics in the court as ‘contemptuous’. This demonstrated that there was a division among the members of the trial in the way they wanted to protest and their differing views of the cases. Despite the fact that they were all under prosecution, that didn’t ease any tension between the political groups. Instead, it increased disliking towards each other due to their urgency to proceed with their own agenda while the counterpart refused to cooperate. 

The Chicago Seven’s lack of unity contributed to their failure to secure a new legislature for the liberals. Although they were grouped together by the court for conspiring against the government, in reality they shared dissimilar beliefs about how to handle the court case. Abbie Hoffman and Jerry Rubin as well as David Dellinger who embodied more of the New Left as Yippies, advocate for a trial to humiliate and display disruption in the courtroom. Rennie Davis and Tom Hayden, the more traditional liberals, advocated for a case to argue for Vietnam. Both groups caused disruptions yet failed to come together and create a solution to put forth to the court. Instead of compromising to come to a single solution to promote, the members went on with their own agenda. Due to their lack of unity it failed to grant the New Left activists any legal wins during the case. One of the defendants, David Dellinger admitted in his closing statement of the trial that “I want to say that sending us to prison…will not solve the problem that has gotten us into ‘trouble’” (Dellinger). The defendant of the trial admitted that the Chicago 7 didn’t establish anything legally other than send themselves to prison. Dellinger claimed in this quote that they didn’t solve any problems that the New Left set out to solve nor achieve any specific goal that the New Lefts had. Although their trial caused many to acknowledge their political view, it failed to change the minds of the people. Without changing people’s perspectives, they lacked the voice to bring forth a legal change to bring their anti-war agenda. As the trial came to the end, Judge Hoffman issued the final verdicts against the defendants. In the Indictment of the Chicago 7, it sentenced the members to jail due to their actions against conspiracy laws. This indictment focused on the wrongdoings of the Chicago 7 and failed to store any ideas for future law cases in favor of New Left activists. Instead the government succeeded in enacting suppression of anti-conspiracy laws such as Title 18. The court had succeeded rather than the New Right activists, in showing how riots/conspiracies will lead to one being punished. Instead of the New Left taking a step forward in order to achieve their agendas in politics, their trial highlighted how the government still held the political power rather than activists. Long term wise, these laws that the New Lefts suffered ended up being temporary as their trial went to an appellate court where most of the charges were appealed. Due to the fact that the trial was seen as unfair and biased, it was declared the trial as a misguided trial and overturned the verdicts rather than side with the New Lefts to guid any new legal reform. In the long term no legal implication remained following the Chicago Seven trial. Thus the New Left had failed in creating a new legislative and following through with their agenda to the political settings. 

Ultimately, the Chicago Seven’s did gain public attention during the duration of the trial which they continued to use to spread New Right ideas throughout their lives. However, their trial failed to change the political and social landscape for the New Right activists. After the trial, the Chicago 7 went to an appellate court where 89 of 131 contempt charges were dropped immediately and more were dropped as the case went on. The members of the trial went on to do different things, but most stayed in politics to advocate their ideas. While some members have died for natural and unnatural reasons, many continue to live out their lives and put themselves in the mainstream of political ideas. 

References

Anthony Lukas, J. 1970. “Judge Soon Rules They Are Still Just Defendants.” New York Times (New York City), February 7, 1970, 43. https://timesmachine.nytimes.com/timesmachine/1970/02/07/76692025.html?pageNumber=43.

Avedon, Richard. 1969. “Chicago Seven, Chicago.” The MET.

https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/284263.  

Brodie, Howard. 1969. Bobby Seale, Bound and Gagged. Library of Congress. Drawing. https://www.loc.gov/exhibitions/drawing-justice-courtroom-illustrations/about-this-exhibition/political-activists-on-trial/bobby-seale-bound-and-gagged/. 

Brodie, Howard. 1969. The Chicago Seven Court Room. Chicago, Illonis: Libary of Congress. Drawing. https://www.loc.gov/exhibitions/drawing-justice-courtroom-illustrations/about-this-exhibition/political-activists-on-trial/the-chicago-seven-court-room/. 

Commire, Anne. 1994. Chicago Seven. Detoit, MI: Gale. https://go.gale.com/ps/retrieve.do?tabID=Biographies&resultListType=RESULT_LIST&searchResultsType=MultiTab&retrievalId=834b3962-13a4-438c-ba71-4b8338fcac9d&hitCount=17&searchType=BasicSearchFo rm&currentPosition=1&docId=GALE%7CK1616000001&docType=Topic+over.

Feiffer, Jules. 1969. My name is Abbie. I'm an orphan of America. I live in the Woodstock Nation.  Library of Congress. https://www.loc.gov/item/2010651374/. 

Gross, Terry. 2020. Author Says The Chicago 7 Trial Reflected 'All The Conflicts In America'.  NPR. https://www.npr.org/2020/11/18/936164085/author-says-the-chicago-7-trial-reflected-all-the-conflicts-in-america. 

Isael, Jerold. 1970. “The Chicago 7 Trial.” LawQuad Notes 15, no. 1 (Fall): 25-27. https://repository.law.umich.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2025&context=lqnotes. 

Lahav, Pnina. 2004. “Theater in the Courtroom: The Chicago Conspiracy Trial.” Law and Literature 16 (3): 318-474. https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1525/lal.2004.16.3.381. 

Levine, Mark L., George C. McNamee, and Daniel Greenberg, eds. 2020. The Trial of the Chicago 7: The Official Transcript. New York City, New York: Simon & Schuster.

United States District Court. 1968. “Grand Jury Indictment of the Chicago Seven.” Goverment, Politics and Protest: Essential Primary Sources, (September), 340. https://go.gale.com/ps/retrieve.do?tabID=Primary&resultListType=RESULT_LIST&searchResultsType=MultiTab&retrievalId=126f3864-4c38-4d8b-a3bd-2caf3d7b8b36&hitCount=4&searchType=BasicSearchForm&currentPosition=1&docId=GALE%7CCX2687500134&docType=Article&sort=R. 

Weiner, Lee. 2020. Conspiracy to Riot: The Life and Times of One of the Chicago 7. First ed. Cleveland, Ohio: Belt Publishing.