Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Labels Stick: Treat All Fairly in Justice System and Beyond

Labels Stick: Treat All Fairly in Justice System and Beyond
Jan. 6, 2021: Brought to you by conflict profiteers
Brent Stirton/Getty Images

The recent four-year anniversary of the attack on the Capitol also called the insurrection, has many referring to it as an attack on democracy, an overturning of the Constitution, or a scheme by President-elect Donald Trump to take the White House. However, it’s not spoken of as a terrorist attack.

Trump has also pronounced that after his inauguration on January 20, he will begin pardons of every person sentenced due to their actions that day on January 6, 2021.


I recently read a social media meme stating: “Black Crime = Gang Violence,” “Arab Crime=Terrorism,” and “Hispanic Crime=Illegal Immigrants,” but “White Crime=Self Defense.” Apparently, this applies to those involved in the Capitol attack.

Although it was numerous different groups involved in the January 6th attack, including the Proud Boys, SkinHeads, Baked Alaska, The Nationalist Social Club, Qanon and Kekistan Flag, however, they were never referred to as a gang.

Even though they conspired to carry out criminal acts that led to people dying and being the victims of aggravated assault, none of the group leaders got sentenced to life in prison.

According to the Department of Justice, 1,572 people were charged with crimes that day, and 1,251 were convicted, including 996 who pleaded guilty. Of those receiving sentences, 645 were sentenced to various periods of incarceration, with 145 sentenced to home detention. Close to 260 people still have cases yet to be reviewed.

None were charged under the “Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act,” or RICO, “which allows authorities to punish offenders engaging in criminal activities” under directions from bosses or higher-ups.

There are individuals in U.S. prisons now who have served more than 50 years, some serving six life sentences for crimes that many would weigh lesser than what so many of us witnessed on January 6 four years ago.

As a veteran, I felt anger to see what U.S. soldiers fought for get desecrated. I felt so vulnerable as a Black man that day because if those involved in the violence that day do this to the institution that is the United States of America, they likely disregard the U.S. Constitution.

Many saw on live television a group of people telling the world they don’t care that others think they are white supremacists. They were out to show the world how supreme they were.

The recent New Year’s Day tragedy in New Orleans, orchestrated by a Black U.S. veteran and self-proclaimed member of ISIS, killed 14 and injured 13 more. The FBI calls it a terrorist event of someone acting alone with pre-meditations.

Although it was many groups involved in the January 6 attack on the United States Capitol who communicated with one another or conspired and committed a criminal act when people died, it has yet to be called gang-related. Nor has anyone faced RICO charges. And no one involved with January 6 has been called a terrorist.

How persons charged with crimes are labeled and treated in the justice system matters. Fair sentencing and deserved clemency matter. Pardons must go to those who deserve it.

Fredrick Womack oversees administrative and organizational operations as Executive Servant for Operation Good Foundation in Jackson, MS. He is a Public Voices Fellow on Transformative Justice through The OpEd Project.


Read More

The Long Tradition of Lawyers Defending U.S. Democracy

women in a courtroom

Getty Images

The Long Tradition of Lawyers Defending U.S. Democracy

For centuries, lawyers have been leaders in establishing and protecting our democracy and its cornerstone, the rule of law. They have challenged tyrants, whether it be King George III in our nation’s founding or President Trump, a wannabe king, today.

Lawyers swear to do this in an oath, which is a condition of admission to the bar, to “support the Constitution of the United States.” This sworn duty continues a centuries-old tradition.

Keep ReadingShow less
The Trump Administration Is Losing Its Fight to Take Over Elections
Rawpixel/Getty

The Trump Administration Is Losing Its Fight to Take Over Elections

The Trump administration has expended significant resources trying to meddle in elections ahead of the midterms. This coordinated campaign includes attempts to limit who can vote, wrestle away states’ authority over elections, and undermine public confidence in election outcomes. So far, virtually everything the administration has tried has been blocked by courts, failed in Congress, or simply fizzled out.

Currently, the administration is 0–21 in its court cases seeking to amass state voter data. In dozens of states, election officials from both parties have refused to turn over their complete voter rolls, which contain confidential personal information, to the Justice Department. Federal courts from Arizona to Maine have thrown out the department’s lawsuits, ruling that the federal government lacks the power to force states to hand over this data on a mass scale.

Keep ReadingShow less
The Erosion of Judicial Integrity
a large white building with columns with United States Supreme Court Building in the background

The Erosion of Judicial Integrity

The partisanship of the Roberts Supreme Court Republicans violates the neutrality central to the rule of law's legitimacy. Moreover, the Founding Fathers, including James Madison, Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, and Alexander Hamilton, viewed avaricious oligarchs and seditious demagogues as the two gravest threats to democracy. They would doubtlessly view the Roberts Republicans – with rulings institutionalizing oligarchic pay-to-play while embracing Trump’s authoritarianism - as another grave threat.

The Rule of Law Survived One Judicial Coup

Keep ReadingShow less
Impunity: Democracy and the Toll of Unchecked Harm

Lady Justice

Photo provided

Impunity: Democracy and the Toll of Unchecked Harm

Impunity is not only the failure to punish. It is a public answer to the question of whether harm matters.

Every democracy must repeatedly answer the question of impunity. When public trust is violated, or when law itself is manipulated or attacked, penalties matter. But the deeper question is whether a society can recognize injury and prevent further harm when it has lost the ability to clearly name wrongdoing.

Keep ReadingShow less