The Southern Poverty Law Center's headquarters in Montgomery, Alabama on February 8, 2023. A federal judge on Friday declined a motion from SPLC to dismiss federal charges brought by the U.S. Department of Justice, writing the SPLC had not shown enough evidence that it was being targeted for opposition to Donald Trump. (Brian Lyman/Alabama Reflector)
A federal court judge Friday denied a motion from the Southern Poverty Law Center to dismiss criminal charges filed by the U.S. Department of Justice over a program that paid informants to gather intelligence on extremist groups.
U.S. District Judge Emily Marks wrote that the civil rights nonprofit did not provide the evidence it needed to show that the Department of Justice was targeting the SPLC because of its opposition to the actions of President Donald Trump.
“Though President Trump has specifically criticized the SPLC, the organization has not provided evidence that the prosecutors working on this case were in any way motivated by his purported animus,” Marks, nominated to the bench by Trump in 2018, wrote in her order.
The Southern Poverty Law Center said in a statement Tuesday it was “disappointed” in the decision but would “continue to vigorously defend ourselves, our staff and our work.”
“SPLC will continue to fight hate and we will continue to envision and create a safer and more just world,” the statement said. “The actions by the DOJ will not shake our resolve to fight for justice and ensure the promise of the Civil Rights Movement becomes a reality for all.”
A federal grand jury in April approved an 11-count indictment against the SPLC, including wire fraud, making false statements to a federally insured bank and money laundering. The DOJ charged that SPLC’s now-discontinued system of paying informants to gather intelligence within white supremacist groups to disrupt their activities amounted to support for those groups and effectively defrauded donors to the SPLC.
The informant program had been publicly reported since at least 1986, and the fact SPLC was paying some informants had been public knowledge since 1994. Attorneys representing the SPLC filed a request with the court in May to have the case dismissed, alleging that the federal government pursued criminal charges based largely on retaliation by the Trump administration.
SPLC cited statements made by FBI Director Kash Patel, Trump and members of Congress. The SPLC also cited an investigation into its informant program during the first Trump administration. The Biden administration ended the investigation, but it was restarted after Trump returned to the White House.
The organization also cited public statements by Trump and Justice officials, including U.S. Attorney General Todd Blanche and Patel, accusing SPLC of manufacturing “the extremism it purports to oppose.”
Marks wrote that none of the examples proved that the charges filed by the federal government were “the result of such animus.”
“While high-ranking Republican members of Congress criticized the SPLC, the SPLC fails to ‘connect any vindictive animus to those making the challenged charging decisions,’” she wrote.
Marks also said the U.S. Attorney’s Office routinely begins, terminates and restarts investigations, and the fact that the Trump administration started the investigation into the program after it was terminated in the Biden administration does not demonstrate vindictive prosecution.
Trump is also free to criticize the SPLC, but there is not enough evidence that he convinced the federal government to file the charges.
“However, the SPLC fails to establish that President Trump’s statements evince animus on the part of the United States Attorney for the Middle District of Alabama,” Marks said.
From Alabama Reflector Post Url: Visit
Author: Ralph Chapoco