Legal Fundraiser for the Charlottesville Torch Rally: Defending Constitutional Rights and the Future of Free Speech

"Fifty years from now, every law student will study the landmark case of the Charlottesville torch march in their 1L Constitutional Law class. They will learn that the First Amendment was born there with Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, both of whom practiced law in the historic courthouse. And they will learn either that free speech was saved there - or that it died there."
- Augustus Invictus

Click here for a write-up about the trial by Greg Conte and the transcripts of the trial.

For larger donations, you can donate through the Free Expression Foundation, which makes your donation tax deductible. Be sure to leave a note that says your donation is for the Invictus case.

The Charlottesville Torch March Prosecutions

On October 11, 2024, Augustus Invictus was convicted of "Burning an Object with Intent to Intimidate" for his participation in the August 11, 2017, torch march at the University of Virginia in Charlottesville. On January 8, 2025, he was sentenced to nine and a half months in jail but was granted an appellate bond pending the outcome of his appeal. Invictus now faces a critical juncture: he must raise $35,000 in legal fees to fund his appeal and fight for a victory that could reverberate far beyond his personal case. This is not just about one man’s freedom — it is about defending the constitutional rights of every American and preserving the principles that define our nation.

Twelve men out of the 300 torch marchers were dragged from across the country to Charlottesville, Virginia and charged with "Burning an Object with the Intent to Intimidate." Nine of those men were forced into plea deals. The first to go to trial, Jacob Dix, won his case, which was dismissed with prejudice because the prosecution violated Dix' First Amendment rights. Invictus is the first of the men to appeal on the constitutionality of the statute and the illegality of the prosecution.

The torch march, a peaceful demonstration organized to protest the removal of Confederate monuments, was an exercise of First Amendment rights to free speech and assembly. Participants, including Invictus, carried tiki torches and chanted slogans to express their political views. Yet, the Commonwealth of Virginia prosecuted Invictus under a statute originally designed to combat Ku Klux cross-burnings, twisting a law meant to address clear acts of racial intimidation into a tool to silence political dissent. This prosecution represents a dangerous overreach, threatening the core liberties enshrined in our Constitution.

The Constitutional Stakes

At the heart of Invictus’ appeal is a fundamental question: Can the government criminalize symbolic speech, such as carrying a torch, without violating the First Amendment? The U.S. Supreme Court has long protected expressive conduct, even when it offends, as seen in cases like Texas v. Johnson (1989), which upheld flag burning as protected speech, and Virginia v. Black (2003), which clarified that cross-burning is only punishable when accompanied by a specific intent to intimidate. Invictus’ defense argues that the torch march did not constitute a “true threat” under the law and that the prosecution failed to prove specific intent to intimidate. Instead, the march was a political statement, protected by the Constitution, and the conviction risks setting a precedent that could criminalize any provocative protest.

The defense also contends that the prosecution’s case infringes on the right to assemble. The marchers were exercising their constitutional right to gather and express their views, yet the government’s response — charging the participants with a novel crime nearly six years later — suggests a politically-motivated effort to punish unpopular opinions. This delayed prosecution raises questions about due process and equal protection under the law, as similar actions by other groups have not faced such scrutiny. A victory in Invictus’ appeal could reaffirm that the government cannot selectively target dissidents based on their beliefs.

Why This Matters for the Dissident Right and America

The outcome of Invictus’ appeal carries profound implications for the dissident right-wing movement and the broader American public. The dissident right, often marginalized and vilified, seeks to challenge the prevailing cultural and political orthodoxy. The torch march was a bold assertion of their right to exist and speak, a stand against the erasure of history and identity. A successful appeal would validate their place in the public square, ensuring that even controversial voices can be heard without fear of retribution.

Beyond the dissident right, this case is a litmus test for the health of American liberty. If the government can criminalize a torch march as “intimidation,” what prevents it from targeting other forms of protest — whether they involve flags, signs, or chants? The precedent set by this case could embolden authorities to suppress any group, left or right, that challenges the status quo. By supporting Invictus’ appeal, we defend the principle that free speech belongs to everyone, not just those who align with mainstream views.

The Path to Victory

Invictus’ legal team is prepared to take this fight to the appellate courts, arguing that the conviction violates constitutional protections and misapplies Virginia’s statute. However, quality legal representation comes at a steep cost. To win this appeal, Invictus must raise $35,000 to cover legal fees, expert consultations, and court expenses. Every dollar contributed brings us closer to a victory that could safeguard our freedoms for generations.

Attorney Terrell N. Roberts, III, who represented Invictus at trial, is now appealing the case. Attorney Roberts has been practicing law in the Courts of Maryland, the District of Columbia and Virginia for nearly 35 years. After admission to the bar in 1978, he went into practice on his own. He specialized in general civil and criminal litigation, and became an accomplished trial attorney, representing clients in both state and federal courts.

In 1985, Mr. Roberts formed the litigation firm of Roberts & Wood and began to focus his practice on civil litigation, including personal injury, auto accidents and medical malpractice. His accomplishments include large jury verdicts in these and other practice areas, including several verdicts in excess of one million dollars.

Mr. Roberts has developed a special expertise in the field of police misconduct and civil rights litigation. In the past two decades, he has helped dozens of clients recover millions of dollars in damages for police brutality and police misconduct, including a 2.7 million dollar verdict for the family of a Howard University student who was killed by the police. Some of his accomplishments in cases against the police were noted in a Washington Post article entitled "Putting the Screws to Police Brutality."

How You Can Help

We call on patriots, free speech advocates, and all who value the Constitution to join this cause. Your donation to Invictus’ legal defense fund is an investment in the fight for liberty. Here’s how you can make a difference:

Donate: Contribute any amount to help reach the $35,000 goal. Every donation counts.
Spread the Word: Share this fundraiser with friends, family, and like-minded communities to amplify our message.
Stay Informed: Follow updates on the case to understand the stakes and celebrate our progress.

Together, we can secure a victory that upholds the First Amendment, protects the right to assemble, and ensures that the dissident right—and all Americans—can speak freely without fear of persecution. Let’s stand with Invictus and send a clear message: our constitutional rights are non-negotiable.

Note: Contributions to legal defense funds may not be tax-deductible. Please consult a tax professional for guidance.