Like Countable?

Install the App
TRY NOW

house Bill H.R. 4187

Should There be a Federal Domestic Terrorism Criminal Statute?

Argument in favor

Domestic terrorism should be subject to the same penalties as international terrorism, and federal prosecutors should be able to charge domestic terrorists accordingly. This bill ensures that this would be the case.

Clarisse's Opinion
···
10/12/2019
Yes, and 45 and the administration should be the first to be put in that category. They have been terrorizing the US and the world since January ‘17.
Like (32)
Follow
Share
Gopin2020's Opinion
···
10/12/2019
This bill must have clear provisions on what’s domestic terrorism , what’s to stop the Radical Leftist Democrats from labeling conservatives as DT or any group that opposes their beliefs or agendas. Just look at what’s been done in the last 4 #MAGA
Like (12)
Follow
Share
Ken's Opinion
···
10/12/2019
Of course there should be. Home grown terrorists are the worst kind. Be careful though. Donald Trump would call anyone that disagrees with him a terrorist.
Like (7)
Follow
Share

Argument opposed

This bill is mostly symbolic and overly broad. Domestic terrorism laws aren’t needed to prosecute those who commit domestic terrorism, who can be charged under numerous other laws. This bill could also be interpreted to include political speech and political acts under the definition of “terrorism.”

jimK's Opinion
···
10/12/2019
This bill as proposed, is way too broad and could be interpreted in ways to abuse those who protest, those who disagree, those who ‘conspire’ within lawful gatherings to legally remove corrupt politicians from office and so on. I would hate for our country to be able to justify our own ‘Tiananmen Square’ control of protestors. While domestic terrorism is an issue, I am not sure that I would classify all mass indiscriminate killing of innocents as ‘terrorist’ acts. I see most of the recent domestic mass shooting incidents as solitary acts committed by deluded individuals who unfortunately have uncontrolled access to the kind of weapons that enable them. Organized domestic terrorist groups are a different matter entirely. Specific legislation that goes after such groups is warranted and I believe has been discussed if not enacted.
Like (68)
Follow
Share
burrkitty's Opinion
···
10/12/2019
This bill has seriously shady wording. Do Gun Control.
Like (38)
Follow
Share
Ayush's Opinion
···
10/12/2019
I would personally support it, but it can easily be misused and abused by the Trump Regime to attack the President’s political opponents. We’ve already seen that Trump is willing to ask a foreign country for help in defacing his challengers, so I wouldn’t put it below him to mark them as domestic terrorists just because they don’t share his views.
Like (26)
Follow
Share

bill Progress


  • Not enacted
    The President has not signed this bill
  • The senate has not voted
  • The house has not voted
      house Committees
      Committee on the Judiciary
      Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security
    IntroducedAugust 13th, 2019

What is House Bill H.R. 4187?

This bill — the Domestic Terrorism Penalties Act of 2019 — would create a distinct domestic terrorism criminal statute. To do this, it would replicate the penal code structure for prosecuting international terrorism to establish similar penalties for crimes committed speicfically under the definition of “domestic terrorism,” as set forth in the PATRIOT Act of 2001. This would penalize individuals who kill, kidnap, assault, damage, or attempt or conspire to do any of the preceding with the intent to influence governmental conduct.

Currently, the U.S. penal code contains a statute for the federal government to charge instances of foreign terrorism. However, no such statute exists for crimes falling under the exclusive purview of domestic terrorism.

Impact

Domestic terrorism; domestic terrorists; federal law enforcement officers; federal prosecutors; and federal prosecution of domestic terrorists.

Cost of House Bill H.R. 4187

A CBO cost estimate is unavailable.

More Information

In-DepthSponsoring Rep. Randy Weber (R-TX) introduced this bill to help federal law enforcement officers and prosecutors better identify and charge those who commit acts of domestic terrorism

“Texas and our nation are still reeling from the devastating shootings of El Paso and Dayton. These crimes have further exposed deficiencies in federal criminal law, deficiencies that my district became all too familiar with following the tragic shooting at Santa Fe High School that left 10 people dead and 13 injured. These acts of domestic terrorism warrant a stronger response than the federal government can currently provide. Unlike international terrorism which has penalties, domestic terrorism exists in federal law but lacks penalties. As a result, individuals who commit crimes that constitute an act of domestic terrorism must be charged under non-terrorism statutes. And, in some cases, the crimes committed by people the FBI describe as domestic terrorism suspects do not violate federal law. Thus, these individuals may never be federally charged as terrorists.”

Original cosponsor Rep. Michael McCaul (R-TX) adds

“The attacks earlier this month in Dayton and El Paso are a stark and hideous reminder that the threat of domestic terrorism is very real. As a former prosecutor, I know our federal domestic terrorism laws are insufficient and lack any real legal recourse to charge domestic terrorists with the crime they’ve committed. The bill we introduced today would change that. It provides the FBI and DOJ with tools to better identify domestic terrorism before it occurs and fully prosecute those responsible. My constituents and I experienced terror in our own community last year when a string of deadly bombings wreaked havoc in Austin, TX. We need to do more than denounce the hateful ideologies that spur this type of violence – we have to take action to better prevent the spread of homegrown radicalization. I look forward to working with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to create safer communities for Americans everywhere.”

Rep. Henry Cuellar (D-TX), this bill’s sole Democratic cosponsor, says, “Designating domestic terrorism as a federal crime will give law enforcement officials the necessary resources to effectively investigate suspects and fully prosecute criminals.”

The FBI Agents Association (FBIAA) is comprised of 14,000 Special Agent members, including approximately 90% of the active Special Agents that have helped lead the effort to criminalize domestic terrorism at the federal level, and endorses this bill. Its President, Brian O’Hare, says: 

“FBIAA supports the Domestic Terrorism Penalties Act of 2019 because it would make domestic terrorism a federal crime, helping ensure that FBI Agents and prosecutors have the best tools to fight domestic terrorism.  Domestic terrorism is a threat to the American people and our democracy. Acts of violence intended to intimidate civilian populations or to influence or affect government policy should be prosecuted as domestic terrorism regardless of the ideology behind them.”

Erik Schechter, CEO of Red Phantom Public Relations and a former defense journalist, criticizes this bill for “warping the meaning” of terrorism to “expand the power of the state and demonize political opponents” without making the public safer: 

“In the wake of recent mass shootings, other lawmakers have put domestic terrorism bills before Congress. For example, the Domestic Terrorism Penalties Act of 2019, introduced in mid-August by Texas Reps. Michael McCaul and Randy Weber, both Republicans, and Democrat Henry Cuellar, establishes federal penalties for a new all-encompassing crime of domestic terrorism, instead of what we have now: circumstance-specific terrorism laws that address bombings, hijackings, etc. According to the congressmen, our regular laws against violence and mayhem (plus 57 federal terrorism-related laws) are insufficient to address terrorists without links to foreign organizations who go on shooting sprees, and this bill will finally plug that hole. I don’t buy it, and here’s why. First, the bill is mostly symbolic. It’s good and right to call the El Paso shooter — who justified his murderous rampage in August as a response to “the Hispanic invasion of Texas”— a domestic terrorist. But public officials can label him that already; they don’t need a change of law… Second, if you want to federally prosecute shooters as domestic terrorists, just create a law that covers politically motivated violence with firearms. Simple. Why have a bill that considers assaults resulting in ‘serious bodily injury’ as terrorism, when such an open-ended category could be used by an overzealous prosecutor against unpopular, low-rent scrappers? Third, the bill describes politically motivated destruction of property as an act of domestic terrorism. Property! Think of the implications. By their logic, McCaul, Weber and Cuellar are saying the Boston Tea Party is an act of terrorism and the Sons of Liberty terrorists.”

Schechter observes that the word “terrorist,” which he calls “the nuclear bomb of political epithets,” is being casually tossed about. He argues that pushing through bills that list too many crimes as terrorism could create a legal landscape in which rioters, political opponents, and protesters could be labeled as terrorists.

Hina Shamsi, director of the ACLU’s National Security Project, says that while domestic terrorism laws “may sound good,” they aren’t actually good policy. In an August 6, 2019 tweet, she said, “FBI officials want more power than they need to investigate & prosecute white supremacist violence, ignoring or downplaying resulting harms to communities of color, Bill of Rights. The last thing we need is to give this gov[ernment] more coercive power.”

Writing in The New Republic, journalist Matt Ford expresses similar concerns with regard to the federal government abusing a domestic terrorism statute to punish political speech and activism. He writes: 

“It’s not hard to imagine the government using these tools against Americans who take part in large-scale protests or who carry out acts of civil disobedience. Federal prosecutors spent a year and a half pursuing riot-related charges against a few dozen protesters who smashed windows and damaged cars during President Donald Trump’s inauguration. The Justice Department also brought charges against Native American activists who protested the Dakota Access pipeline in Standing Rock, North Dakota, in 2016, alleging they started fires and built illegal roadblocks. The extreme sentences attached to the crimes would give prosecutors significant leverage over defendants to strike a plea deal even if they believe the case is unjust. History also gives pause. The federal government has a mixed record at best when it comes to defining what constitutes domestic terrorism. The Hoover-era FBI’s campaign to harass civil rights activists and infiltrate antiwar groups in the 1950s and 1960s is still within living memory. In the 1990s and early 2000s, the FBI described ecoterrorism as the “number one domestic terrorism threat” and faced criticism from its inspector general in 2010 for inappropriately monitoring nonviolent groups like Greenpeace and PETA. More recently, the Bureau responded to the Black Lives Matter movement’s rise by warning about the possibility of domestic terrorism from “black identity extremists,” a spurious category at best.”

The Los Angeles Times’ editorial board, expressing its opposition to the establishment of a federal terrorism statute, points out there are potential constitutional issues with enacting a federal hate crime law. As an example, they point out that while it’s a crime for Americans to provide “material support or resources” to designated foreign terrorist organizations, criminalizing support for domestic political groups, however extreme, could threaten First Amendment free speech protections. Testifying before the House Homeland Security Committee, Deputy Assistant Attorney General Brad Wiegmann acknowledged this reality, saying, “Designating domestic groups as domestic terrorism organizations and picking out particular groups [whose views] you say you disagree with ... is going to be highly problematic.”

This legislation has 12 bipartisan House cosponsors, including 11 Republicans and one Democrat. 


Of NoteThe U.S. currently doesn’t have a single statute criminalizing all domestic terrorism. Instead, it has several federal terrorism staututes that apply in the purely domestic context. Writing for Lawfare, Bobby Chesney, a professor at the University of Texas School of Law, observes that there are two gaps in existing law: 1) cases where attacks don’t use explosives and 2) cases where someone provided material support for an attack of domestic terrorism, but wasn’t involved in carrying out the attack.

However, despite these gaps, Chesney observes that people involved in terrorist attacks aren’t getting away with their crimes. He writes

“We do not have a situation in which persons who are involved in terrorist attacks somehow end up walking free, or getting improperly light sentences, due to a gap in the scope or calibration of criminal laws. This is true regardless of the scope of federal criminal law, for the states are the primary source of criminal law in the American system and every state has a wide array of general-purpose state criminal laws applicable to terrorist acts: murder, attempted murder, conspiracy, destruction of property and so forth. In some states, capital charges are available in some circumstances… The most one can say on this point is that many states do not have capital punishment, and Congress thus would be making a practical difference by providing a capital option via a new federal domestic terrorism offense… As an initial matter, I’m very doubtful that this specific gap (the lack of the death penalty in some states) is playing a significant role in the calls for a new federal crime of domestic terrorism. Perhaps some are advancing that point, but not that I’ve seen. Second, federal law already provides a capital option for some important domestic terrorism scenarios.”

To Chesney and Ford, recent cases where white nationalist terrorists have been punished without a federal domestic terrorism law prove that such a law isn’t needed. They point out that federal prosecutors successfully brought hate crime charges against Dylann Roof, who murdered nine black parishioners at a Charleston church in 2015. More recently, Pittsburgh shooter Robert Bowers, who allegedly killed eleven Jewish congregants at a synagogue in 2018, is being tried for 44 counts, including firearm-related charges and obstructing the free exercise of religion through violence.


Media:

Summary by Lorelei Yang

(Photo Credit: iStockphoto.com / Allkindza)

AKA

Domestic Terrorism Penalties Act of 2019

Official Title

To penalize acts of domestic terrorism, and for other purposes.

    Yes, and 45 and the administration should be the first to be put in that category. They have been terrorizing the US and the world since January ‘17.
    Like (32)
    Follow
    Share
    This bill as proposed, is way too broad and could be interpreted in ways to abuse those who protest, those who disagree, those who ‘conspire’ within lawful gatherings to legally remove corrupt politicians from office and so on. I would hate for our country to be able to justify our own ‘Tiananmen Square’ control of protestors. While domestic terrorism is an issue, I am not sure that I would classify all mass indiscriminate killing of innocents as ‘terrorist’ acts. I see most of the recent domestic mass shooting incidents as solitary acts committed by deluded individuals who unfortunately have uncontrolled access to the kind of weapons that enable them. Organized domestic terrorist groups are a different matter entirely. Specific legislation that goes after such groups is warranted and I believe has been discussed if not enacted.
    Like (68)
    Follow
    Share
    If I thought this would be applied to white supremacy and domestic gun violence I could support it. However- this Orwellian administration makes me think this would be a statute abused by the corrupt criminal trump regime. 🤷‍♀️ Orwellian propaganda and lies are spewing forth with reckless abandon and this is a dangerous situation fomented by dangerous delusional demagogue Dotard trump.
    Like (44)
    Follow
    Share
    This bill has seriously shady wording. Do Gun Control.
    Like (38)
    Follow
    Share
    I would personally support it, but it can easily be misused and abused by the Trump Regime to attack the President’s political opponents. We’ve already seen that Trump is willing to ask a foreign country for help in defacing his challengers, so I wouldn’t put it below him to mark them as domestic terrorists just because they don’t share his views.
    Like (26)
    Follow
    Share
    All this is is to charge anyone who goes against trump and the trumpets. Domestic terrorism is treason against the United States period! They do not give a rat's ass about We The People. They only care about protecting themselves and their pockets. This is to keep We The People afraid to speak out against them. Just like Russia!!! There's already law against treason. Enough is enough!
    Like (17)
    Follow
    Share
    Why duplicate when existing is already in the books. Is this another ”good feeling law” to bolster a hidden ego? Just enforce current law!
    Like (14)
    Follow
    Share
    We already have laws that cover everything a terrorist would do. Let’s keep it simple and not add more to a complicated system already when it’s not necessary
    Like (14)
    Follow
    Share
    We already have laws for this. Why are all these Republicans putting in Bills that are either unnecessary or duplicates of what protections we already have? So they can say that Dems are blocking their “efforts”? DO SOME REAL WORK ...LIKE GUN CONTROL ...which SHOULD BE soooo simple.
    Like (13)
    Follow
    Share
    This bill must have clear provisions on what’s domestic terrorism , what’s to stop the Radical Leftist Democrats from labeling conservatives as DT or any group that opposes their beliefs or agendas. Just look at what’s been done in the last 4 #MAGA
    Like (12)
    Follow
    Share
    **If this could be applied to ANTIFA- Radical Left Groups- Orwellian COLLEGE ‘PROFESSORS SJW’ In the Classroom- I would strongly support it. **Assist w/ Ukraine/China and Biden’s Family. **Always Support 1A and 2A- The DNC is Fascism at its Finest.
    Like (11)
    Follow
    Share
    I don’t trust this bill. Do gun control instead.
    Like (10)
    Follow
    Share
    The #45 fascist regime will use these tools against Americans who take part in large-scale protests, who carry out acts of civil disobedience, political opponents and anyone who questions or disagrees with their policies!
    Like (10)
    Follow
    Share
    There are already laws against threats, assault, and violence. Adding more laws is unnecessary and a danger to liberty.
    Like (9)
    Follow
    Share
    Not necessary: Duplication.
    Like (9)
    Follow
    Share
    I don't think we need a new statute. We do, however, need better guidelines and push for enforcement of these laws to be used against domestic terrorism, which is currently the greatest threat to American lives.
    Like (9)
    Follow
    Share
    On the surface sounds like a good idea, but I can see this corrupt administration using it to put the "fake media" and their other "enemies" away for terroristic threats So for now I vote no way in hell
    Like (8)
    Follow
    Share
    Of course there should be. Home grown terrorists are the worst kind. Be careful though. Donald Trump would call anyone that disagrees with him a terrorist.
    Like (7)
    Follow
    Share
    After the trump admin leave office preferably in cuffs. They would abuse it to persecute political rivals, minority civil rights groups, and anyone that upsets him in to an angry tweet.
    Like (7)
    Follow
    Share
    If we already have existing laws that cover acts of domestic terrorism, then this legislation is unnecessary. Let's not limit the scope of how these crimes can be charged.
    Like (7)
    Follow
    Share
    MORE