January, 20 2021, 11:00pm EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Email:,press@civilrights.org,Phone: (202) 869-0398
135 Civil Rights Organizations Oppose a New Domestic Terrorism Charge
WASHINGTON
Dear Member of Congress:
On behalf of The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights (The Leadership Conference), a coalition charged by its diverse membership of more than 220 national organizations to promote and protect civil and human rights in the United States, and the undersigned 134 organizations, we write to express our deep concern regarding proposed expansion of terrorism-related legal authority. We must meet the challenge of addressing white nationalist and far-right militia violence without causing further harm to communities already disproportionately impacted by the criminal-legal system. The Justice Department (DOJ), including the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), has over 50 terrorism-related statutes it can use to investigate and prosecute criminal conduct, including white supremacist violence, as well as dozens of other federal statutes relating to hate crimes, organized crime, and violent crimes. The failure to confront and hold accountable white nationalist violence is not a question of not having appropriate tools to employ, but a failure to use those on hand. To date, DOJ has simply decided as a matter of policy and practice not to prioritize white nationalist crimes.[1] Congress should use its oversight and appropriations authorities to ensure that law enforcement appropriately focuses investigative and prosecutorial resources on white nationalist crimes.
We urge you to oppose any new domestic terrorism charge, the creation of a list of designated domestic terrorist organizations, or other expansion of existing terrorism-related authorities. We are concerned that a new federal domestic terrorism statute or list would adversely impact civil rights and -- as our nation's long and disturbing history of targeting Black Activists, Muslims, Arabs, and movements for social and racial justice has shown -- this new authority could be used to expand racial profiling or be wielded to surveil and investigate communities of color and political opponents in the name of national security. As the Acting US Attorney for the District of Columbia stated on January 12, 2021 regarding the January 6 insurrection attack on the Capitol, federal prosecutors have many existing laws at their disposal to hold violent white supremacists accountable.[2]
The magnitude of last week's attack demands that Congress focus on ensuring that our government addresses white nationalist violence as effectively as possible. Members of Congress should not reinforce counterterrorism policies, programs, and frameworks that are rooted in bias, discrimination, and denial or diminution of fundamental rights like due process. Rather, as highlighted below, Congress should focus on its oversight and appropriations authority to ensure that the federal government redirect resources towards the ever-growing white nationalist violence plaguing our country, and hold law enforcement accountable in doing so.
Law Enforcement Has the Tools to Hold White Nationalist Insurrectionists Accountable
White supremacist violence goes back to our nation's founding, and has never been appropriately addressed--and it manifested last week in an unprecedented way. On January 6, 2021, thousands of pro-Trump supporters, many of them radical, right-wing, white supremacists, unlawfully and violently broke into the nation's Capitol. The rioters, some with "Camp Auschwitz" shirts, others carrying confederate flags, and some who hung a noose on the Capitol grounds, were intent on blocking the ratification of President-elect Biden's electoral win. Some carried weapons and zip ties, reportedly to kidnap or kill members of Congress and the Vice President. Because of the violent mayhem that ensued, at least five people lost their lives and countless others were wounded. As this historic event on the nation's legislative branch by violent white nationalist insurrectionists is being investigated thoroughly, we know that our federal law enforcement officials have more than enough tools at their disposal to address the attack on the Capitol.
According to the federal government's own research and reports, white nationalist violence has been on the rise for years with the FBI reporting that more murders motivated by hate were recorded in 2019 than any year before.[3] This 2019 data included the El Paso massacre, when a white supremacist targeted the Latino community and shot and killed 23 people after publishing a manifesto in which he embraced white nationalist and anti-immigrant hatred.[4] The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the FBI have repeatedly testified before Congress, stating that the greatest threat to US national security emanates from white supremacist violence.[5]
Yet, despite overwhelming evidence making clear the source of the threat [6], the federal response has failed to prioritize an effective policy to combat white nationalist violence. Instead, the federal government has disproportionately targeted and surveilled Black and Brown people, including increasingly targeting Arabs and Muslims since 9/11, treating them as threats to US national and homeland security. This has led to the over-policing of these communities, including intrusions into community centers, mosques, and almost every aspect of their lives.[7] US counter-terrorism policy has devastated communities of color and religious minorities, and by failing to rein in white nationalist violence in a serious way, those same communities suffer twice over: first by being over-criminalized and securitized and second, by having the state not respond to white nationalists who target them.
What Should Congress Do?
Congress should not enact any laws creating a new crime of domestic terrorism, including the Confronting the Threats of Domestic Terrorism Act (H.R. 4192 in the 116th Congress) or any other new charges or sentencing enhancements expected to be introduced in the 117th Congress "to penalize acts of domestic terrorism." These bills and others with similar provisions are the wrong approach because, as we have seen, they will continue to be used as vehicles to target Black and Brown communities as they have done since their inception.[8] The federal government has no shortage of counterterrorism powers, and these powers have been and will be again used to unjustly target Black and Brown communities, including Muslim, Arab, Middle Eastern, and South Asian communities, as well as those engaged in First Amendment-protected activities.[9] The creation of a new federal domestic terrorism crime ignores this reality and would not address the scourge of white nationalism in this country.
Instead, Congress should use its oversight and appropriations powers to demand that federal agencies make public how they have and are now using resources to fight white supremacist violence. Moreover, Congress should support other efforts to address the white supremacy at the core of these violent attacks. At the outset, Congress should identify ways to address the white supremacist infiltration of law enforcement that was documented by the FBI. This, a clear and present danger, which was highlighted at an Oversight Committee hearing last year, puts lives at risk and undermines the criminal legal system.[10] Hate crimes data should be mandated and made publicly available so federal leaders, as well as those at the state and local level, can address the threat in a manner best suited to their community. Finally, the Leadership Conference encourages Congress to regularly, hold hearings featuring communities that are experiencing white nationalist violence in an effort to encourage accountability and transparency. This would allow Congress to provide communities impacted by white supremacist violence support to develop and lead their own programs to meet the needs that they identify.
Please contact Becky Monroe at monroe@civilrights.org and Iman Boukadoum at boukadoum@civilrights.org to further discuss this matter or if there are questions or concerns.
Sincerely,
The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights
Access Now
Act To Change
Advancement Project, National
Alabama State Association of Cooperatives
American Civil Liberties Union
American Friends Service Committee
American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC)
Americans for Democratic Action (ADA)
Amnesty International USA
Andrew Goodman Foundation
ANYAHS Inc.
Appleseed Foundation
Arab American Institute
Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund (AALDEF)
Asian Americans Advancing Justice | AAJC
Augustus F. Hawkins Foundation
Autistic Self Advocacy Network
Bend the Arc Jewish Action
Black Alliance for Just Immigration (BAJI)
Brennan Center for Justice
Bridges Faith Initiative
Brooklyn Defender Services
Center for Constitutional Rights
Center for Democracy & Technology
Center for Disability Rights
Center for International Policy
Center for Law and Social Policy (CLASP)
Center for Popular Democracy/Action
Center for Security, Race and Rights
Center for Victims of Torture
Center on Conscience & War
Charity & Security Network
CLEAR project (Creating Law Enforcement Accountability & Responsibility)
CODEPINK
Color Of Change
Common Cause
Common Defense
Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR)
Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), Washington Chapter
Defending Rights & Dissent
Demand Progress
Demos
Detention Watch Network (DWN)
Drug Policy Alliance
Durham Youth Climate Justice Initiative
Emgage Action
End Citizens United / Let America Vote Action Fund
Equal Justice Society
Equality California
Federal Public and Community Defenders
Fight for the Future
Free Press Action
Freedom Network USA
Friends Committee on National Legislation
Government Information Watch
Greenpeace US
Human Rights Campaign
Human Rights First
Human Rights Watch
Immigrant Defense Network
Immigrant Justice Network
Immigrant Defense Project (IDP)
In Our Own Voice: National Black Women's Reproductive Justice Agenda
Interfaith Alliance
Japanese American Citizens League
Justice for Muslims Collective
Kansas Black Farmers Association/Nicodemus Educational Camps
KinderUSA
Labor Council for Latin American Advancement
Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law
Legal Aid Society of Metropolitan Family Services
Louisiana Advocates for Immigrants in Detention
Matthew Shepard Foundation
Montgomery County (MD) Civil Rights Coalition
MPower Change
Muslim Advocates
Muslim Justice League
Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC)
NAACP
NAACP LEGAL DEFENSE AND EDUCATIONAL FUND, INC. (LDF)
National Alliance for Partnerships in Equity (NAPE)
National Association of Social Workers (NASW)
National Council of Jewish Women
National Education Association
National Employment Law Project (NELP)
National Equality Action Team (NEAT)
National Immigration Law Center (NILC)
National Immigration Project of the National Lawyers Guild (NIPNLG)
National LGBTQ Task Force Action Fund
National Network for Immigrant & Refugee Rights
National Organization for Women (NOW)
National Partnership for Women & Families
National Women's Law Center
NETWORK Lobby
New America's Open Technology Institute
North Carolina Association of Black Lawyers Land Loss Prevention Project
Open MIC (Open Media & Information Companies Initiative)
Open The Government
Oxfam America
Palestine Legal
Partnership for Civil Justice Fund
People's Parity Project
Presbyterian Church (USA)
Progressive Turnout Project
Project Blueprint
Project On Government Oversight
Public Advocacy for Kids (PAK)
Public Citizen
Public Justice
Quixote Center
Radiant International
Restore The Fourth
Rethinking Foreign Policy
Rural Coalition
S.T.O.P. - The Surveillance Technology Oversight Project
Sisters of Mercy of the Americas Justice Team
South Asian Americans Leading Together (SAALT)
Southeast Asia Resource Action Center (SEARAC)
SPLC Action Fund
TASH: equity, opportunity and inclusion for people with disabilities
Texas Progressive Action Network
The Human Trafficking Legal Center
The Sentencing Project
The Sikh Coalition
Transformations CDC
True North Research
Tuskegee University
UnidosUS
Union for Reform Judaism
United Church of Christ, OC Inc.
US Human Rights Network
Veterans for American Ideals
Voices for Progress
Win Without War
Wind of the Spirit Immigrant Resource Center
Workplace Fairness
The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights is a coalition charged by its diverse membership of more than 200 national organizations to promote and protect the civil and human rights of all persons in the United States. Through advocacy and outreach to targeted constituencies, The Leadership Conference works toward the goal of a more open and just society - an America as good as its ideals.
(202) 466-3311LATEST NEWS
Supreme Court Urged to 'Rule Quickly' After Trump Immunity Arguments
"It'd be a travesty for justices to delay matters further," said one legal expert.
Apr 25, 2024
After about three hours of oral arguments Thursday on former President Donald Trump's immunity claims, legal experts and democracy defenders urged the U.S. Supreme Court to rule swiftly, with just over six months until the November election.
Trump—the presumptive Republican candidate to challenge Democratic President Joe Biden, despite his 88 felony charges in four ongoing criminal cases—is arguing that presidential immunity should protect him from federal charges for trying to overturn his 2020 loss to Biden, which culminated in the January 6, 2021 insurrection at the U.S. Capitol.
Justices across the ideological spectrum didn't seem inclined to support Trump's broad immunity claims—which critics have said "reflect a misreading of constitutional text and history as well as this court's precedent." However, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) shared examples of what it would mean if they did.
"Trump could sell pardons, ambassadorships, and other official benefits to his wealthy donors, members of his clubs, or cronies who helped him commit other crimes," CREW warned. "Trump could sell nuclear codes and government secrets to help pay back crippling debts."
"But this isn't just about what Donald Trump could do. It's really about how total immunity for the president would threaten our democratic system of checks and balances," the group continued. "The president could order the military to assassinate activists, political opponents, members of Congress, or even Supreme Court justices, so long as he claimed it related to some official act."
After warning that a president could also order the occupation or closure of the Capitol or high court to prevent actions against him, CREW concluded that "the Supreme Court never should have taken this appeal up in the first place. They should rule quickly and shut these ludicrous claims down for good."
The organization was far from alone in demanding a quick decision from the nation's highest court.
"In the name of accountability, the court must not delay its decision," the Brennan Center for Justice said Thursday evening. "The Supreme Court's time is up. It needs to let the prosecution move forward. The court decided Bush v. Gore in three days—it should act with similar alacrity in deciding Trump v. U.S."
In Bush v. Gore, the case that decided the 2000 election, the high court issued a related stay on December 9, heard oral arguments on December 11, and issued a final decision on December 12.
On Thursday, the arguments "got away from the central question: Is a former president immune from criminal prosecution if he tried to overthrow a presidential election, using private means and the power of his office to do so?" the Brennan Center noted. "The answer is simple: No."
"It is not an 'official act' to try to overthrow the peaceful transfer of power or the Constitution, even if you conspire with other government officials to do it or use the Oval Office phone," the center said. "Trump's attorney was pushing the court to come up with a sea change in the law. That's unnecessary and a delay tactic that will hurt the pursuit of justice in this case."
In a departure from previous claims, Trump's attorney, D. John Sauer, "appeared to agree with Special Counsel Jack Smith, who is leading the prosecution, that there are some allegations in the indictment that do not involve 'official acts' of the president," NBC Newsreported, noting questions from liberal Justice Elena Kagan and conservative Justice Amy Coney Barrett, a Trump appointee.
Barrett summarized various allegations from the indictment and in three cases—involving dishonest election claims, false allegations of fraud, and fake electors—Sauer conceded that Trump's alleged conduct sounded private, suggesting that a more narrow case against the ex-president that excluded any potential official acts could proceed.
Due to Trump attorney's concessions in Supreme Court oral argument, there's now a very clear path for DOJ's case to go forward.\n\nIt'd be a travesty for Justices to delay matters further.\n\nJustice Amy Coney Barrett got Trump attorney to concede core allegations are private acts.\u2b07\ufe0f— (@)
According to NBC:
Matthew Seligman, a lawyer and a fellow at the Constitutional Law Center at Stanford Law School who filed a brief backing prosecutors, said Sauer's concessions highlight that Trump is "not immune for the vast majority of the conduct alleged in the indictment."
Ultimately, he said, the case will go to trial "absent some external intervention—like Trump ordering [the Justice Department] to drop the charges" after having won the election.
At the same time, Sauer's backtracking might have little consequence from an electoral perspective. Further delay in a trial, which Sauer is close to achieving, is a form of victory in itself.
Slate's Mark Joseph Stern pointed out that when Barrett similarly questioned Michael Dreeben, the U.S. Department of Justice lawyer arguing the case for Smith, it seemed like they "were trying to work out some compromise wherein the trial court could distinguish between official and unofficial acts, then instruct the jury not to impose criminal liability on the former."
"It was fascinating to watch Barrett nodding along as Dreeben pitched a compromise that would largely preserve Smith's January 6 prosecution but limit what the jury could hear, or at least consider," Stern added. "That, though, would take months to suss out in the trial court. More delays!"
Stern and other experts signaled that the decision likely comes down to Barrett and Chief Justice John Roberts, with the three liberals seemingly supporting the prosecution of Trump and the other four conservatives suggesting it is unconstitutional.
People for the American Way president Svante Myrick said in a statement that "today's argument brought both good and bad news. It was chilling to hear Donald Trump's lawyer say that staging a military coup could be considered part of a president's official duties."
"Thankfully, the majority of the court, including conservative justices, did not seem to buy that very broad Trump argument that a former president is absolutely immune from prosecution under any circumstances," Myrick added. "On the other hand, it's not clear that there is a majority on this court that will quickly reject the immunity arguments and let the case go forward in time for a trial before the election. That's a huge concern."
Trump was not at the Supreme Court on Thursday; he was at his trial in New York, where he faces 34 counts for allegedly falsifying business records related to hush money payments to cover up sex scandals during the 2016 election cycle. The are two other cases: a federal one for mishandling classified material and another in Georgia for interfering with the last presidential contest.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Just the Beginning': 50+ Arrested for Blockading Citigroup Bank Over Climate Crimes
"Through people-powered resistance, we can give money a conscience and stop Citi's destruction of our planet," said one Indigenous campaigner.
Apr 25, 2024
Twenty more demonstrators were arrested Thursday, the second day of Earth Week protests targeting Citigroup's Manhattan headquarters in what organizers called "the beginning of a wave of direct actions to take place over the summer targeting big banks for creating climate chaos that is killing our communities and our planet."
Protest organizers—who include Climate Defenders, New York Communities for Change, Planet over Profit, and Stop the Money Pipeline—said 53 activists were arrested over two days of demonstrations, which included blocking the entrance to Citigroup's headquarters, to "demand that the bank stop funding fossil fuels."
Organizers said this week's demonstrations "were just the beginning" of what they're calling a "Summer of Heat" targeting big banks for their role in the climate emergency and for "polluting our land, air, and water, and threatening the health of children, families, and our planet." Citigroup is the world's second-largest fossil fuel financier.
"We're holding Citi accountable for financing dirty fossil fuels from Canada to Latin America and beyond," said Chief Na'moks of the Wet'suwet'en Nation, one of several Indigenous leaders who took part in the action. "Through people-powered resistance, we can give money a conscience and stop Citi's destruction of our planet."
Jonathan Westin, executive director of Climate Defenders, asserted that "Citigroup's racist funding of oil, coal, and gas is creating climate chaos that's devastating communities of color across the country."
"We're taking action to tell Citi that we won't put up with their environmental racism for one more day," Westin continued. "Our communities have reached the boiling point. Our children have asthma, our city's sky was orange, and our air polluted because of the climate crisis caused by Citi and Wall Street."
"We're going to keep organizing and taking direct action until Citi listens to us," he vowed.
Stop the Money Pipeline co-director Alec Connon said: "To have any chance of reigning in the climate crisis, we must stop investing in fossil fuel expansion. Yet, Citibank is pumping billions of dollars into new coal, oil, and gas projects."
"We're here to make it clear: If they're going to fund the companies disrupting our climate and our lives, we're going to disrupt their business," Connon added.
Activists have repeatedly targeted Citigroup in recent years as the megabank has pumped more than $300 billion into fossil fuel investments around the world since the Paris climate agreement.
According to the protest organizers:
Citi has provided $668 million in funding to Formosa Plastics between 2001-2021, which is trying to build a $9.4 billion plastics facility in a majority Black community in the heart of Cancer Alley in Louisiana.
Citigroup is also one of the biggest funders of state-run oil and gas companies in the Amazon basin, pumping in over $40 billion between 2016-2020, and a major backer of Petroperú, which has been involved in oil spills and Indigenous rights violations.
"From wildfires, heatwaves, and floods to deadly air pollution and mass drought, Citi's fossil fuel financing is killing us," said Alice Hu of New York Communities for Change. "We've sent polite petitions and had pleading meetings with bank representatives, but Citi refuses to stop pouring billions each year into coal, oil, and gas."
"That's why we're fighting for our lives now with the best tool we have left: mass, nonviolent disruptive civil disobedience," Hu added.
Keep ReadingShow Less
No Outside Probe, US Reiterates as Gazans Reportedly Buried Alive in Mass Grave
"How does it ever make sense that the United States asks the accused party to examine itself?" asked one incredulous reporter.
Apr 25, 2024
A Biden administration spokesperson once again brushed off calls for an independent investigation into how hundreds of Palestinians found in mass graves near Gaza hospitals died when asked Thursday about new reports that many of the victims were tortured, summarily executed—and in some cases, buried alive by Israeli invaders.
During a Thursday U.S. State Department press conference in Washington, D.C., a reporter noted Gaza officials' claim that mass grave victims "including children were tortured before being killed" and that "some even showed signs of being buried alive, along with other crimes against humanity."
"What's wrong with an independent, scientific, forensic investigation?"
Noting calls by Palestinian officials and United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk for an independent probe into mass graves, the reporter said that "this administration repeatedly said that it asks... the Israeli government to investigate itself."
"How does it ever make sense that the United States asks the accused party to examine itself and provide reports that you have previously said that you actually trust?" the reporter asked State Department Principal Deputy Spokesperson Vedant Patel. "What's wrong with an independent, scientific, forensic investigation?"
Patel replied: "We continue to find these reports incredibly troubling. And that's why yesterday you saw the national security adviser for this to be thoroughly investigated."
While National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan on Wednesday called reports of mass grave atrocities "deeply disturbing" and said that "we want answers" from Israel, he did not call for an independent investigation.
When the reporter pressed Patel on the legitimacy of asking Israel to investigate itself, Patel said, "we believe that through a thorough investigation we can get some additional answers."
Thursday's exchange followed a similar back-and-forth on Tuesday between Patel and Said Arikat, a journalist for the Jerusalem-based
Palestinian news outlet al-Quds who asked about the mass graves.
At least 392 bodies—including numerous women and children—have been found in mass graves outside Nasser Hospital in Khan Younis, southern Gaza, where Palestinian Civil Defense and other workers have been exhuming victims for nearly a week. Officials believe there are as many as 700 bodies in three separate mass graves.
Based on more recent exhumations, local Civil Defense chief Yamen Abu Sulaiman said during a Wednesday press conference that "we believe that the occupation buried alive at least 20 people at the Nasser Medical Complex."
"There are cases of field execution of some patients while undergoing surgeries and wearing surgical gowns," he stated, adding that some victims showed signs of torture and 10 bodies had medical tubes attached to them.
Gaza Civil Defense official Mohammed Mughier told reporters that "we need forensic examination" to definitively determine the causes of death for the 20 people believed to have been buried alive.
Previous reporting on the mass graves quoted rescue workers who said they found people who were apparently executed while their hands were bound, with some victims missing heads, skin, and internal organs.
Other mass graves have been found in Gaza, most notably on the grounds of al-Shifa Hospital, where Israeli forces last month committed what the Geneva-based Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Monitor called "one of the largest massacres in Palestinian history."
It's also not the first time there have been reports of Israeli troops burying victims alive during the current war, in which Palestinian and international officials say Israeli forces have killed or wounded more than 122,000 Gazans, including at least 11,000 people who are missing and feared dead. Israeli forces attacking Kamal Adwan Hospital in Beit Lahia last December reportedly bulldozed and buried alive dozens of injured patients and displaced people.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular