This was just an arraignment.
At an arraignment the judge reads all the charges the prosecutor is considering and accepts a plea from the defendant.
After the defendant pleads not guilty, the prosecutor will reexamine the charges and the validity of the case. Depending on how the prosecutor evaluates the case (both judicially and politically, unfortunately) charges may be lowered or dropped entirely.
Large numbers of people who are arraigned have the charges dropped.
A review of U.S. Code Title 16 section 1538 does not reveal any prohibitions that would apply to this case.
A review of CFR Title 50 Section 17.21c2 does state
Quote:
|
Notwithstanding paragraph (c)(1) of this section, any person may take endangered wildlife in defense of his own life or the lives of others.
|
I suspect these charges will be dropped.
The prosecutor would have to prove that this person was not in fear of his or his family's lives. A mother grizzly bear and her cubs outside a reserve an on personal property, evidently hunting for food, would reasonably be considered a threat.
Not that I agree with Hill's conduct. But I don't believe his actions would be illegal.