Are Civil Rights Activists A Threat? The FBI Thinks So.
By targeting so-called “Black Identity Extremists,” the FBI raises the prospect that simply advocating for equal rights is “extremist”
Racial minorities have long been the target of violent protests and discrimination throughout our country’s history, and the recent tragedy in Charlottesville reminds us that these struggles remain. At such a critical moment when the FBI should redouble its efforts to combat violence inspired by white supremacists, the Bureau has inexplicably decided to target those seeking to defend the rights of racial minorities. Such a move is a throwback to the 1960s when the FBI led by J. Edgar Hoover demonized civil rights leaders daring to fight for equal justice, including the Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr.
The decision by the FBI’s Domestic Terrorism Analysis Unit to label African Americans “Black Identity Extremists” is extremely dangerous. We know that newly emboldened white supremacists and other bigots are targeting communities of color. The FBI should redouble its efforts to fight this extremism. By diverting resources in order to target African Americans, the FBI is going down a dangerous path that threatens the civil rights and privacy rights of racial minorities, in addition to the public safety of all Americans.
We know from our history what happens when the FBI chooses to go after civil rights advocates and leaders — lives are ruined, the Constitution is eroded, and corruption is rampant.
As one of the oldest racial justice organizations in the country, the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law is gravely concerned with the FBI’s Intelligence Unit’s invention of a so-called security threat that harkens back to the worst of times for the Bureau. As the names suggests, the unifying feature of this manufactured threat appears to be the color of a person’s skin.
In addition to other important areas of focus, the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law urges members of the Senate Judiciary Committee to ask the Attorney General the following questions this week during its oversight hearing of the Department of Justice, which oversees the FBI.
(1) What does it mean to have the Black Identity Extremist designation applied to an individual or organization? Does the fact that this is a designation created by the Domestic Terrorism Unit mean that individuals or organizations will be subject to additional surveillance? Does this trigger COINTELPRO-like surveillance?
(2) What are the factors that the FBI considers when deciding whether and individual or organization is designated as a Black Identity Extremist?
(3) What is the Department of Justice doing to address the well-documented violent threat posed by white supremacists across the country?
(4) What is the Department of Justice doing to address patterns and practices of unconstitutional policing, including patterns and practices that lead to the unlawful use of excessive force against all people, including African Americans, across country?
(5) What is the Department of Justice doing to ensure that this new designation does not sweep in all people who choose to protest and or advocate against racial violence?
The sweeping breadth of the new designation raises serious concerns that people who are advocating for equal rights and against police brutality will be designated a threat, rather than recognized as engaging in constitutionally protected activity that is central to our democracy.
The FBI attempts to define Black Identity Extremists as people who “advocate the use of unlawful acts of force or violence, in response to perceived racism and injustice in American society.” Rather than providing any evidence to support this new umbrella designation, the FBI raises the prospect that advocating for equal rights in and of itself is an extremist activity that constitutes a threat. It states: “The mere advocacy of political or social positions, political activism, use of strong rhetoric, or generalized philosophic embrace of violent tactics may not constitute extremism, and may be constitutionally protected.” (Emphasis supplied)
As an organization that advocates for equal rights, and has helped represent individuals protesting unconstitutional policing, we welcome an explanation of when the “mere advocacy of social positions, political activism, use of strong rhetoric” would constitute extremism warranting designation as a terrorism threat that would not be constitutionally protected.
The principal mission of the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law is to secure equal justice for all through the rule of law, targeting in particular the inequities confronting African Americans and other racial and ethnic minorities. Our work focuses on areas of criminal justice, fair housing and community development, economic justice, educational opportunities, and voting rights. We are also working to help communities prevent and respond more effectively to hate crimes, including supporting local leaders and law enforcement leaders to share their experiences of hate in the community to strengthen police-community relations.
Across the country, we hear from local community leaders who are committed to working together to realize this country’s sacred promise of equal justice and equal rights. Many are working across perceived divisions of race, color, national origin, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, and disability. These leaders strengthen our democracy; far from a threat, they may be our country’s greatest hope.
