Although political violence in the United States is a real problem, state domestic terrorism laws are arguably unnecessary. Indeed, federal policymakers have resisted enacting a specific crime of domestic terrorism, in part because of First Amendment concerns. In prominent cases of mass violence, such as the Oklahoma City Bombing, the Boston Marathon Bombing, or the church shooting in Charleston, the federal government successfully convicted the perpetrators without needing terrorism charges. Instead, they relied on a variety of laws that already criminalize violence. Besides being arguably unnecessary, state domestic terrorism laws can cause serious unintended consequences.
As this report will show, the overbroad and vague provisions of state domestic terrorism laws create significant First Amendment and free expression concerns. Read full report here.
At this moment, a dangerous convergence of two trends threatens democracy. The first is the Trump administration’s aggressive acceleration of...
The purpose of this short guide is to share know-your-rights information for individuals who engage in the First Amendment right...
Youth in the AV should have schools that promote their academic, emotional, and social growth in an environment in which...
We showcase existing solutions and new research from the community. Support us by sharing your own resources to our hub.