The courts are currently clogged with cases that represent much of the right-wing extremism and disinformation campaigns of the past decade. The cases also show the temporary nature of the legal responses to such campaigns, a range of tools that can act as deterrents – though not to real justice.
It is both amazing and hopeful at the same time. Astonishing, because it is an indication of how quickly the far right has grown and how deeply it has penetrated American politics. Hopefully, as it shows how strongly the legal system is responding to the twin dangers of extremism and disinformation. That strong response is far from automatic — and even now, possibly less than the nation needs.
Both right-wing extremism and disinformation – two interrelated phenomena in the United States today, such as the “Stop Theft” protests and the January 6 uprising – are problems. especially difficult for the justice system to deal with. There are several reasons why.
Legally, the fundamental rights to freedom of association, freedom of the press, and freedom of speech have made the courts cautious about intervening. That’s one reason why the United States doesn’t have a federation
domestic anti-terrorism law to match its regime of foreign terrorism: too many methods used to combat foreign terrorism are unconstitutional when used against U.S. citizens.
Culturally,
hug value The right of white Americans to arm themselves has made it difficult for law enforcement and legislators to appreciate the depth of the threats facing the United States.
Kyle Rittenhouse, who was
not guilty of all charges Friday, and has said he went to Kenosha, Wisconsin, to defend businesses and act in self-defense when he shot three men, or Mark and Patricia McCloskey, who said that they are protecting themselves and their property
when they swing their guns at Black Lives Matter, protesters in the St. Louis, have been hailed as heroes by many on the right – portrayed as extensions of the law rather than those accused of breaking the law. The McCloskeys spoke defiantly on the first night of
2020 Republican National Convention.
And while the quantity
far-right extremist groups explode
transparent President Barack Obama’s Campaign and Administration, Until 2020, Department of Homeland Security
admit Violent white supremacy, largely fueled by right-wing extremism, is seen as “the most persistent and deadly threat in the homeland”.
There are also historical reasons that the legal system has struggled to address right-wing violence and white nationalism. As historian Kathleen Belew noted in her 2018 book “
Bringing War Home: The White Power Movement and Paramilitary America“, federal prosecutors tried to bring conspiracy cases against white power groups that were involved in terrorist violence and murder, only to lose repeatedly in court. In 1979 , a group made up of members of the Ku Klux Klan and the American Nazi Party killed 5 people Anti-apartheid protesters – the killings were captured on video – were only freed on trial. Prosecutors have drawn lessons from such cases to track down violent extremists one by one, winning famous cases like the one against the Oklahoma City bombers, but holding back. efforts to prosecute the entire network of activists behind the violence.
As criminal prosecutions stalled, anti-apartheid organizations like the Southern Poverty Law Center turned increasingly to civil lawsuits to limit the reach of powerful American organizations. White. As Belew notes, they successfully sued organizations such as the nonexistent White Patriot Party and won damages for a man who was murdered by white supremacist groups in Greensboro, North Carolina, in 1978. Civil lawsuits proved to be a valuable tool for bankrupting, dismantling and exposing extremist networks.
That is still true to this day. Lawsuits against the organizers of the Charlottesville protests have the potential to financially cripple the groups responsible for the violence. And civil lawsuits against Jones and the right-wing networks who spread election conspiracies could prove that willful disinformation comes with a price no store can afford. .
The rise of far-right extremism has also prompted prosecutors to rethink the tools available to bring criminal cases against violent extremists. In 2019, the federal government secured
convict the first conspiracy fought against right-wing extremists for decades against four members of the white far-right group Rise Above Movement for their part in the deadly Charlottesville riot. This has encouraged prosecutors to pursue more conspiracies – some are underway involving the rebels on January 6 – although
They realized Such cases are especially difficult to prove in court.
The dual legal approach – pursuing both criminal and civil action – is an important development in efforts to combat right-wing extremism. But perhaps the most notable change is on the cultural front. For the first time in modern America, there is a powerful conversation not only about the threat of right-wing extremism but also the vast coverage of networks that spread disinformation and feed far-right violence. That has given more Americans not only a language to talk about this threat, but a conceptual framework to better understand it. That’s important, because it makes it possible for us to visualize a range of responses to that threat.
This is not to say that all Americans are open to the new understanding of far-right violence. The right has cultivated a conservative victim-martyr complex in response to increased attacks on these extremist groups. Efforts to prosecute the January 6 uprisings, for example, have spurred a small-scale media industry that portrays insurgents as righteous fighters and political prisoners (most recently in the trilogy series). part of Tucker Carlson”
Patriotic PurgeLikewise, the Justice Department’s efforts to protect school boards from threats of violence have become fodder for outraged howls that the agency is mistreating parents.
That creates a real limit to prosecution as a deterrent. Someone like Steve Bannon wears his indictment with contempt charges like a badge of honor, proof of his unwavering loyalty to both Donald Trump and the political forces that brought him to the position of president. But more than that, the fear of white decline and oppression at the root of so much right-wing politics—and at the very root of so much American law and politics—makes Completely countering the resulting extremism is difficult. from that fear.
Those limits are why patchwork efforts to destroy extremist groups will remain necessary: with a political party unwilling to recognize the dangers of these forces – indeed, welcome them. with open arms – those who seek to restrain themselves will have to continue to create.
