RICO is a law that is meant to protect against racketeering and corrupt groups. Specifically, you don't need to have committed a crime yourself - you can be guilty BY ASSOCIATION.
Example: Pro-life protesters outside an abortion clinic were arrested and charged as 'racketeers' under RICO. The Supreme Court upheld that charge, ruling that pro-lifers can be charged as being part of a corrupt organization.
(the key word in RICO is actually 'extortion', which is what the city of Hartford vs. Pro Lifers was using in that particular case)
Thus, anyone trying to force a group or people to do things they don't want to do, even through non-criminal means (peaceful protest, for instance) can be charged in a court of law for trying to extort. Pro-life protesters are comparatively peaceful, but certainly threatening and intimidating.
What Tony was referring to, I believe, is that Rosa Parks could have been charged not just for a minor misdemeanor (paying $14 for breaching city regulations) but for a felony as a 'racketeer' if RICO had been available. Right now, any peaceful protesters can be charged by any city or state under RICO.
Of course, you may be thinking that imprisoning pro-lifers is a good and just cause, and quietly cheer in front of your monitor. But then, maybe it's the anti-war protesters next; or the civil rights protesters; or the anti-SSSCA protesters. Who knows? The fact of the matter is that RICO gives the US a *very* strong weapon in dealing with GUILT BY ASSOCIATION.
Sure, you may be thinking that it'd be silly to prosecute lots of patently innocent people through such a law. Unfortunately, "between 1970 and 1985 there were only 300 civil RICO decisions, and the Department of Justice prosecuted only 300 criminal RICO cases between 1970 and 1980. In 1986, 614 civil RICO suits were filed; 957 were filed in 1988; the average is now well over a thousand per year."
Relevant link:
<a href="http://www.thirdamendment.com/rico.html">RICO</a>
X.