What’s Wrong With The SPLC IndictmentDOJ's indictment of the Southern Poverty Law Center is a critical moment in the administration's war on democracy
Civil rights organizations protect us when our rights are at risk. You, personally, may not need that today. But over the long stretch of time, it’s more than likely you, or someone you care about, will. It’s like the famous Martin Niemöller quote: “First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a socialist. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a trade unionist. Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew. The civil rights community stands up for the people “they come for.” That translates into real progress. People can live their lives, love who they want to, be paid fairly for their labor, have access to jobs, education, and travel, and vote. Civil rights groups are there when government isn’t. And that has never been more important than it is now. That may explain why this administration has been so intent on disassembling civil society groups in America. They’ve come for government agencies, universities, and the law firms that pursued the same goals and, in many cases, worked in the trenches with civil rights groups. Now, having demonized DEI and turned the work of DOJ’s Civil Rights Division on its head—they’ve turned their focus to protecting Christians from discrimination and preventing eligible Americans from voting—the direct attack on the nation’s civil rights group is on, starting with the indictment filed this week against the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) in Montgomery, Alabama. Here’s the central thesis of the case: The Justice Department wants us to believe that one of the nation’s leading civil rights groups, the people who broke the Klan and continue to expose the white supremacist groups that crop up in its wake, is actually supporting racism and domestic terror, that they’re in fact responsible for whipping up the frenzy. This indictment tells a story, and the story is that SPLC engaged in material support for domestic terrorist groups. The indictment rises or falls on one faulty premise: that you should look only at one piece of SPLC’s work to infiltrate these dangerous groups, not at their overall efforts to dismantle them. DOJ predicates its wire fraud charges, which we discussed here, on the assumption that people who donated to SPLC would be unhappy that their dollars were used to fund paid informants who obtained inside information about what white supremacists and other groups were up to. DOJ uses tunnel vision to convince people—because that’s what this indictment is about, convincing the public before the case ever gets to trial—that the Southern Poverty Law Center is responsible for everything from the tragic violence at the Charlottesville “Unite The Right” Rally during Trump’s first term in office to, well, who knows what all. To hear acting AG Todd Blanche and FBI Director Kash Patel sell it in a very unusual press conference (that took place in Washington, D.C., without the U.S. Attorney who indicted the case in Montgomery, Alabama, present), SPLC is responsible for the rise of domestic violence in America today. It’s ironic coming from the administration of a man who solicited his followers to come to Washington, D.C., on January 6 to fight for him, which they did. It’s easy to see how problematic that approach will be when it comes to a jury, which must unanimously go along with this flawed argument in order to convict. The information SPLC developed served its donors in more ways than might be immediately obvious. Dismantling hate groups is the organization’s explicit goal. It works toward it in multiple ways, including, very importantly, educating young people to “vaccinate” them against hate’s efforts to recruit them. Information is a form of sunlight, the best disinfectant, and SPLC uses it to great effect. DOJ will have to prove that donors were defrauded beyond a reasonable doubt.
Paragraph 9 in the indictment puts the internal contradiction in the indictment on full display: “9. Between at least 2014 and 2023, the SPLC paid their Fs [the designation DOJ says is used for paid sources] in a clandestine manner. Doing so hid the fact that while the SPLC received donation money under the auspices that the funds would be used to ‘dismantle’ violent extremist groups, this donation money was, instead, being used, in part, by the SPLC to pay leaders and others within these same violent extremist groups. That money was then used for the benefit of the individuals as well as the violent extremist groups.” If you want to learn about white supremacists, you have to go and talk to them. You can’t get the information you need from the outsiders. You need access to people who are not choirboys. SPLC obtained it. And then used it for precisely the purpose they told donors they were going to use it for. So why bring an indictment like this at all? SPLC is not the only non-profit that uses informants, and some commentators have suggested that right-wing groups like Project Veritas could be accused of the same thing. Why single out SPLC? Why do it now? Why indict only the non-profit, not the individuals whose actions are discussed in the indictment in ways that suggest DOJ knows who they are? That last point stands out, in light of a new directive at DOJ, issued just last month, directing prosecutors to hold individuals accountable, not just corporate entities, who, of course, cannot go to jail.
Is it just about fining SPLC, because they can never be jailed? Or, is it something darker? No one who uses informants goes out and tells the public they’re doing that—it would defeat the purpose and expose the informants to harm. So of course SPLC didn’t publicize that specific method to their donors. Federal law enforcement vigorously protects its sources, especially paid ones who are embedded with dangerous foreign and domestic terror groups. But DOJ is playing with fire when it comes to SPLC’s informants. In paragraph 11 of the indictment, they all but name some of the key informants, providing the groups they belong to with sufficient information to identify them. Many of them will already be deceased. Some may still be alive. But it doesn’t matter. It’s the message that this sends. It’s a warning to anyone who might consider cooperating with anti-hate groups in the future: “Don’t do it!” It’s a message of intimidation from the leadership of DOJ, delivered for the benefit of their audience of one—if you align yourself against us, we can take you down. In essence, this indictment is about protecting domestic terror groups from exposure, not about prosecuting a real crime that SPLC committed. Here’s an example. Paragraph 11c of the indictment serves as a potent warning to people not to cooperate with civil rights groups who are trying to expose or dismantle white supremacist domestic terror groups: “F-unknown was the Imperial Wizard of the United Klans of America. In an article published on November 22, 2013, the SPLC described the group as a ‘millennial reboot of what was once a serious domestic threat.’” Message received. Don’t cooperate with organizations like SPLC against domestic terror groups. That seems to be the primary purpose of this indictment. We don’t yet know the evidence the government intends to offer, but there are some legal flaws in the indictment and its theories, and it’s sloppy when it comes to the facts. For instance, back to paragraph 11c, which identifies the Imperial Wizard of the United Klans as one of SPLC’s sources. It continues: “In its prime, the United Klans of America was responsible for, among other things, the 16th Street Baptist Church bombing in Birmingham, Ala., which resulted in the deaths of four little girls in 1963." Except that’s not true. My office indicted that case. We were careful to specify in the indictment that the church bombing was committed by a splinter group that was too violent for even the United Klans. DOJ should have gotten a basic fact like that correct. They didn’t. It has no bearing on SPLC’s guilt. But it suggests that this is not a carefully crafted indictment, as one would expect from an undertaking so major that the Attorney General himself would conduct the press conference announcing it from Washington, D.C. It makes you wonder, if they weren’t careful with the details in the indictment, what other mistakes were made? This indictment will make it more difficult for nonprofit civil rights groups to track domestic terrorism in a moment when the FBI and DOJ seem to have abandoned that work. This indictment is a warning. In October 1973, DOJ’s Civil Rights Division filed a civil suit against Donald Trump, his father, and the Trump Management Company, alleging that they systematically discriminated against Black and Puerto Rican tenants in their New York City apartment buildings in violation of the Fair Housing Act of 1968:
Some former employees, like a doorman at Trump properties, told investigators that Black applicants were often told no apartments were available when they in fact were, and the units were offered to white applicants. The Trumps hired Roy Cohn, Trump’s gold standard for lawyers, and countersued for $100 million. Donald Trump learned to go on the offensive when under attack. The initial tip to the Civil Rights Division came from the National Urban League, one of the civil society groups that, like SPLC, works to protect Americans’ rights. The Trumps and their company entered into a consent decree settling the litigation in 1975. Trump billed it as a win—his company wasn’t required to formally admit guilt. But that’s how consent decrees frequently work, and the company was obligated to put safeguards in place to ensure apartments were rented without regard to race, color, religion, sex, or national origin in compliance with the Housing Act. That’s how civil rights work protects all of us and now, it’s on the chopping block. The indictment against the SPLC is very troubling, not only because of its flaws, but because of what it represents—an attack on the civil rights community itself. This week, they may have come for the SPLC. It’s unlikely it will stop there. We’re in this together, Joyce You're currently a free subscriber to Civil Discourse with Joyce Vance . For the full experience, upgrade your subscription.
|
No comments:
Post a Comment