Reject overly broad domestic terrorism laws – Pasadena Star News

Of all the bad ideas proposed in Washington, D.C., H.R. 350, the proposed Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act, ranks up there with the worst of them.

The bill introduced on Jan. 19 aims to “strengthen law enforcement efforts to prevent, report on, respond to and investigate acts of domestic terrorism,” according to a news release from Rep. Brad Schneider, D-Illinois, one of the lawmakers behind the legislation, which is also supported by Illinois Sen. Dick Durbin. Citing the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol, Schneider said the government must have “the tools to identify, monitor and thwart” the illegal activities of “extremists” and “radicalized” domestic terror groups.

The devil is in the details. It’s one thing to investigate and prosecute illegal activity. It’s something else to monitor Americans and report on their activities in the belief that they may seek to commit illegal activities in the future.

H.R. 350 would set up three offices within the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Justice and the FBI to monitor “domestic terrorism” threats, with a specific focus on white supremacists. The bill requires these offices to report to Congress twice a year on the most significant threats.

The bill also writes into law the Domestic Terrorism Executive Committee, which would coordinate with federal prosecutors and other public safety officials to share information about detecting and deterring threats of domestic terrorism. The law would also direct the Department of Defense to coordinate with federal law enforcement to prevent the infiltration of the military and law enforcement by white supremacists.

There is no justification or defense for racism, white supremacy or domestic terrorism. At the same time, there are profound constitutional concerns raised by the establishment of multiple federal offices to monitor Americans who have not committed any crime in order to find out if they’re saying anything judged to be similar to the words used by people who did commit a crime.

Freedom of speech is protected by the First Amendment, but that guarantee isn’t worth the parchment it’s printed on if federal officials are authorized and directed to screen electronic communications and spy on community political meetings, and to share with law enforcement agencies the names of people believed to be potential terrorists based on those legal activities.

We don’t have to look very far to see how easy it is for a government agency to improperly harass those who hold particular political views.

During the Obama administration, the Internal Revenue Service applied unjustified extra scrutiny to conservative groups applying for nonprofit status, searching out those with “patriot” or “tea party” in their names and sending the groups intrusive demands for personal information about members and donors.

Americans may also remember more sinister abuses of power by the government by way of the FBI’s COINTELPRO, which began in the 1950s and persisted through the 1960s, and saw the infiltration and disruption (often by illegal means) of movements and organizations deemed subversive.

Last week, over 100 civil rights groups, including the American Civil Liberties Union and NAACP, signed a letter opposing new legislation, mindful that the overly broad powers and tools justified for one reason may well in the future morph into an unwieldy hammer trampling over the liberty of even more Americans.

The federal government has enough laws and tools to root out criminal threats. There’s no need to grant federal authorities even more power.