The US Supreme Court ruled Monday that human rights advocates who advise a foreign terrorist group – even if only to promote nonviolent means to settle a dispute – can be prosecuted for providing "material support" for that group. The 6-3 decision, which upholds a law that bans Americans from aiding designated terrorist organizations, did nonetheless say that there may be "more difficult cases" in which interaction with a terrorist group might be protected as free speech or freedom of assembly under the Constitution.
What do you think? Is there any type of work with a terrorist group that would not be "material support" of its activities?
Please share your constructive ideas on the form below: