"Isn't it illegal to support a designated terrorist organization?"
No, so long as it does not involve material support. Simple statements of support have never been included in the specifications of "material support" in legislation.
You can imagine why this is so. The designation of "terrorist" is at the discretion of the government. If the government wished to nullify the First Amendment, which would statutorily require Congressional and state legislative approval, it could do so simply by identifying causes it disapproved of as terrorist. For example, the current administration seems to wish Ukraine to lay down arms and accept dictated terms. Many in the US do not support this. With Ukraine using drones to attack targets in Russia, the administration could declare the Ukrainian military a terrorist organization. If supportive speech were considered "material support," the majority of Americans would then know that expressing opposition to the administration's policy was illegal.
Isn't it illegal to support a designated terrorist organization?
If so, his "speech" (both verbal and the protests he led and organized) were support of hamaz and therefore not 1A speech at all
"Isn't it illegal to support a designated terrorist organization?"
No, so long as it does not involve material support. Simple statements of support have never been included in the specifications of "material support" in legislation.
You can imagine why this is so. The designation of "terrorist" is at the discretion of the government. If the government wished to nullify the First Amendment, which would statutorily require Congressional and state legislative approval, it could do so simply by identifying causes it disapproved of as terrorist. For example, the current administration seems to wish Ukraine to lay down arms and accept dictated terms. Many in the US do not support this. With Ukraine using drones to attack targets in Russia, the administration could declare the Ukrainian military a terrorist organization. If supportive speech were considered "material support," the majority of Americans would then know that expressing opposition to the administration's policy was illegal.