Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

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

Donald Trump
Donald Trump
YouTube

When Belief Becomes Law: The Rise of Executive Rule and the Vanishing of Facts

During his successful defense of the British soldiers accused of killing Americans in the Boston Massacre of 1770, John Adams, the nation's second president, famously observed that "facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations or the dictates of passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence."

Times have changed. When President Trump fired the head of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, saying that the jobs numbers compiled by the agency's nonpartisan analysts and experts "were RIGGED” some pundits observed that you can fire the umpire, but you can’t change the score.

Keep ReadingShow less
Inside Courthouse Immigration Arrests: Controversy, Legal History, and Implications

People protest in Chicago as part of the No Kings Rallies at Daley Plaza on June 14, 2025 in Chicago, Illinois.

Photo by Kamil Krzaczynski/Getty Images for No Kings

Inside Courthouse Immigration Arrests: Controversy, Legal History, and Implications

Background

On the campaign trail, Donald Trump promised voters, “One day, I will launch the largest deportation program of criminals in the history of America.” On his inauguration day, he published a directive for Immigration and Customs and Enforcement (ICE) officers to use their own discretion when conducting immigration arrests. Since then, ICE officers have arrested immigrants in or around courthouses in at least seven different states.

Keep ReadingShow less
ICE Policy Challenged in Court for Blocking Congressional Oversight of Detention Centers

Federal agents guard outside of a federal building and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detention center in downtown Los Angeles as demonstrations continue after a series of immigration raids began last Friday on June 13, 2025, in Los Angeles, California.

Getty Images, Spencer Platt

ICE Policy Challenged in Court for Blocking Congressional Oversight of Detention Centers

In a constitutional democracy, congressional oversight is not a courtesy—it is a cornerstone of the separation of powers enshrined in our founding documents.

Lawyers Defending American Democracy (LDAD) has filed an amicus brief in Neguse v. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, arguing that ICE’s policy restricting unannounced visits by members of Congress “directly violates federal law.” Twelve lawmakers brought this suit to challenge ICE’s new requirement that elected officials provide seven days’ notice before visiting detention facilities—an edict that undermines transparency and shields executive agencies from scrutiny.

Keep ReadingShow less
A person in a military uniform holding a gavel.

As the Trump administration redefines “Warrior Ethos,” U.S. military leaders face a crucial test: defend democracy or follow unlawful orders.

Getty Images, Liudmila Chernetska

Warrior Ethos or Rule of Law? The Military’s Defining Moment

Does Secretary Hegseth’s extraordinary summoning of hundreds of U.S. command generals and admirals to a Sept. 30 meeting and the repugnant reinstatement of Medals of Honor to 20 participants in the infamous 1890 Wounded Knee Massacre—in which 300 Lakota Sioux men, women, and children were killed—foreshadow the imposition of a twisted approach to U.S. “Warrior Ethos”? Should military leaders accept an ethos that ignores the rule of law?

Active duty and retired officers must trumpet a resounding: NO, that is not acceptable. And, we civilians must realize the stakes and join them.

Keep ReadingShow less