Bragg Drops Charges Against Woman Who Attacked Pro-Life Advocate

Authored by Jonathan Turley,

For years, many of us have raised concerns over the political weaponization of the New York legal system from the civil fraud case against the Trump company by New York Attorney General Letitia James to the criminal prosecution by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg. The popularity of these lawfare warriors shows how a dual legal system has taken hold in the city. That was never more evident than in the outrageous decision of Bragg to drop the case against Brianna J. Rivers, 30, who assaulted a pro-life advocate in a case of political violence. The refusal to prosecute Rivers is only the latest example of enabling those who turn to violence in our political system.

Rivers was captured on videotape attacking Craven Antao after she asked Rivers questions about abortion and repeated her answers.

New York police arrested Rivers in April on one count of second-degree assault. Prosecutors had this videotape that showed no provocation or excuse for the violent attack.  Antao had to go to emergency room for stitches and pay $3,000 in medical bills.

Nevertheless, Bragg’s office first downgraded the charge from second-degree assault to a misdemeanor and has now dropped the case entirely. He is just going to let Rivers walk after an act of political violence captured on film.

According to reports, Braggs’ office missed a critical deadline to turn over evidence. However, this came after the office downgraded the case and then threw up its hands after missing the deadline. It is either a case of intentional scuttling or a lack of priority given an allegation of political violence. The most that Braggs’ office can claim is that it is incompetent.

Bragg’s office could not focus on bringing even a misdemeanor case to show that political violence is unacceptable, even from those on the left.

If this were a pro-life advocate attacking a pro-choice person in New York, it is hard to imagine Bragg slow-walking the prosecution, downgrading the charges, and then dismissing the case after missing a deadline. There would have been an outcry from the public for deterrence and prosecution.

We have also seen the wholesale dropping of charges against rioters in major cities despite massive levels of property damage.

Compare the handling of lawyers in New York City who threw Molotov cocktails at police with a recent case in California. The attorneys (Colinford Mattis and Urooj Rahman) were given generous plea deals by the Southern District of New York with only 15 months in jail. The judge even praised one of the lawyers for her commitment to public interest. There were no state charges.

This week, a ‘scholar-activist” received almost 20 years in prison and a nearly $100,000 in fines for firebombing a University of California Berkeley police car and other acts of arson. Casey Goonan also claimed political motivations in supporting Palestine in the attacks.

Even given the more extensive record of violence of Goonan, the light punishment given to the New York lawyers was shocking to many of us. Admittedly, that was not a state case, but rather a federal case under the Biden Administration. However, it reinforced the uncertainty as to punishment for serious crimes in New York. There was no apparent move by the district attorney to bring state charges or to push for more serious penalties from their federal counterparts.

At a time of increased political violence, including the assassination of Charlie Kirk, Bragg’s decision sends a chilling message to the most extreme elements in our political system.