VOlUME 05 ISSUE 01 JANUARY 2022
Donald L. Buresh, Ph.D., J.D., LL.M.
Morgan State University
Google Scholar Download Pdf
ABSTRACT
The purpose of this essay is to discuss the January 6, 2021 riot and its relationship to the USA FREEDOM Act and to how Thomas Hobbes and John Locke would react to the content of extremist material on the Internet. The paper argues that the January 6, 2021 riot could be construed as an example of extremist behavior that may be regulated on the federal level. The possible opinions of Thomas Hobbes and John Locke are analyzed, demonstrating that in society, there is a wide range of opinions regarding how extremisms should be addressed. The answers are not clear-cut but require fine-tuning as high emotions dissipate and calmer minds prevail.
KEYWORDS:Extremist Material, January 6, 2021 Riot, John Locke, Thomas Hobbes, USA FREEDOM Act of 2015
REFERENCES
1) Erin Doherty, & Oriana Gonzalez, In photos: An hour-by-hour record of the Jan. 6 Capitol riot, Axios (Jan. 6, 2022), available at https://www.axios.com/capitol-riot-january-6-anniversary-c61435e4-f4c4-4f5a-b6d1-9c463ac7eed2.html.
2) See generally, Thomas Dreisbach, Meg Anderson, & Barbara van Woerkom, 5 Takeaways from the Capitol Riot Criminal Cases, One Year Later, NATIONAL PUBLIC RADIO (Jan. 5, 2022), available at
https://www.npr.org/2022/01/05/1070199411/5-takeaways-from-the-capitol-riot-criminal-cases-one-year-later.
3) Chris Cameron, These Are the People Who Died in Connection With the Capitol Riot, THE NEW YORK TIMES (Jan. 5, 2022), available at https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/05/us/politics/jan-6-capitol-deaths.html.
4) Jonathan Tamari, & Julia Terruso, ‘A clear and Present Danger.’ Pa., N.J. Democrats Say Threats Remain a Year After the Jan. 6 Insurrection, PHILADELPHIA INQUIRER (Jan. 6, 2022), available at https://www.inquirer.com/news/pa-jan-6-anniversary-casey-wild-kim-20220106.html.
5) Charlie Savage, Was the Jan. 6 Attack on the Capitol an Act of ‘Terrorism’?, THE NEW YORK TIMES (Jan. 7, 2022), available at https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/07/us/politics/jan-6-terrorism-explainer.html.
6) Ryan Lucas, Where the Jan. 6 insurrection investigation stands, one year later, NATIONAL PUBLIC RADIO (Jan. 6, 2022), available at https://www.npr.org/2022/01/06/1070736018/jan-6-anniversary-investigation-cases-defendants-justice.
7) Holman W. Jenkins, Jr., Why the Jan. 6 ‘Big Lie’ Narrative Will Fail, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL (Jan. 7, 2022), available at https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-big-lie-narrative-will-fail-mainstream-media-jan-6-journalism-2020-election-capitol-riot-protest-trump-11641574341.
8) The Editorial Board, Democracy Isn’t Dying, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL (Jan. 5, 2022), available at https://www.wsj.com/articles/democracy-isnt-dying-capitol-riot-jan-6-donald-trump-election-11641421265.
9) Holman W. Jenkins, Jr., supra, note 8.
10) Jody C. Liu, So what does the USA Freedom Act do anyway?, LAWFARE, (June 03, 2015), available at https://www.lawfareblog.com/so-what-does-usa-freedom-act-do-anyway,
11) Benjamin Wittes, & Jodie Liu, So What’s in the New USA Freedom Act, Anyway?, LAWFARE (May 14, 20915), available at https://www.lawfareblog.com/so-whats-new-usa-freedom-act-anyway.
12) USA Freedom Act of 2015 (Pub. L. 114-23), available at https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/PLAW-114publ23/html/PLAW-114publ23.htm.
13) Jody C. Liu, supra, note 11.
14) Williams, Thomas Hobbes: Moral and Political Philosophy, INTERNET ENCYCLOPEDIA OF PHILOSOPHY, (n.d.), available at https://www.iep.utm.edu/hobmoral/.
15) M. ASHLEY, THE GLORIOUS REVOLUTION OF 1688 (Charles Scribner's Sons 1996).
16) Hobbes, Locke, Montesquieu, and Rousseau on Government, CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS FOUNDATION, (n.d.), available at http://www.crf-usa.org/bill-of-rights-in-action/bria-20-2-c-hobbes-locke-montesquieu-and-rousseau-on-government.html.
17) Mosley, John Locke: Political philosophy, INTERNET ENCYCLOPEDIA OF PHILOSOPHY, available at https://www.iep.utm.edu/locke-po/.
18) P. J. Connolly, John Locke (1632—1704), INTERNET ENCYCLOPEDIA OF PHILOSOPHY, (n.d.), https://www.iep.utm.edu/locke/.
Hobbes, Locke, et al., supra, note 28.
19) P. KRUGMAN & R. WELLS, ECONOMICS (Worth Publishers. 2017).
20) Hobbes, Locke, et al., supra, note 28.
21) Liu, supra, note 11.
22) J. Otis, In Opposition to Writs of Assistance, (1761), available at http://www.bartleby.com/268/8/9
23) Entick v. Carrington, 19 How. St. Tr. 1029 [1765], available at
https://learninglink.oup.com/static/5c0e79ef50eddf00160f35ad/casebook_19.htm.
24) Liu, supra, note 11.
25) C. CARLTON, CHARLES I: THE PERSONAL MONARCH (Routledge 2nd ed. 1995).
26) Carlton, supra, note 45.
27) Mosley, supra, note 29.
28) JOHN LOCKE, TWO TREATISES OF GOVERNMENT (Awnsham Churchill, at the Black Swan in Ave-Mary-Lane at Amen-Corner 1690).
29) Ashley, supra, note 27.
30) Fact Sheet: Section 215 of the USA PATRIOT Act, CENTER FOR STRATEGIC AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES (2014), available at https://www.csis.org/analysis/fact-sheet-section-215-usa-patriot-act.
31) Katniss Li, Section 215 of the Patriot Act Expected to Sunset in December, JOLT DIGEST (Oct. 28, 2019), available at https://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/section-215-of-the-patriot-act-expected-to-sunset-in-december.
32) C. GRAY, RELUCTANT GENIUS: THE PASSIONATE LIFE AND INVENTIVE MIND OF ALEXANDER GRAHAM BELL (Arcade 2006).
33) Mosley, supra, note 29.
34) See generally: HENDRIK SPRUYT, THE SOVEREIGN STATE AND ITS COMPETITORS (Princeton University Press 1994).
35) Brad Schneider, Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act (DTPA) of 2021, CONGRESSMAN BRAD SCHNEIDER (Jan. 19, 2021), available at https://schneider.house.gov/media/press-releases/domestic-terrorism-prevention-act-dtpa-2021-introduced-house. Generally, this law on domestic terrorism could be the basis of a federal law against extremeism both domestically and internationally.
36) Stephen J. Ceci, & Wendy M. Williams, Who Decides What Is Acceptable Speech on Campus? Why Restricting Free Speech Is Not the Answer, PERSPECTIVES ON PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE (May 2, 2018), available at https://journals.sagepub.com/eprint/I6zYjCxgsdtnFbmPm9FI/full.
37) Chaplinsky v New Hampshire, 315 U.S. 568 (1942), available at https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/315/568/#tab-opinion-1937331. Here, fighting words are words that by speaking such words inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace.
38) Espionage Act of 1917, DIGITAL HISTORY, available at
https://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/disp_textbook.cfm?smtid=3&psid=3904.
39) Christina L. Boyd, Sedition Act of 1918 (1918), THE FIRST AMENDMENT ENCYCLOPEDIA (n.d.), available at https://www.mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/1239/sedition-act-of-1918.
40) See Beauharnais v. Illinois, 343 U.S. 250 (1952), available at https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/343/250/. Here, the Supreme Court held that speech that was made by the defendant breached the U.S. libel laws, and was not protected by the First and Fourteenth Amendments.
41) See Matal v. Tam, 582 U.S. ___ (2017), available at https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/582/15-1293/#tab-opinion-3749203. Here, the Court opined that the Lanham Act provisions that prohibited trademark registrations that denigrate persons, institutions, beliefs, or national symbols violated the First Amendment.
42) Harold Edgar & Benno C. Schmidt Jr., The Espionage Statutes and the Publication of Defense Information, 73 COLUMBIA L. REV. 5, (May 1973), available at https://fas.org/sgp/library/edgar.pdf.
43) THE TRADING WITH THE ENEMY ACT (40 Stat. 411, enacted 6 October 1917, codified at 12 U.S.C. §§ 95a–95b and 50 U.S.C. App. §§ 1–44) restricts trade with countries that are hostile to the United States, giving power to the President to restrict trade using executive orders.
44) The Defense Secrets Act of 1911 (Pub. L. 61–470) was one of the first American that criminalized the disclosure of government secrets.
45) Edgar & Schmidt, supra, note 69.
46) See Schenck v. United States, 249 U.S. 47 (1919), available at https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/249/47/. Here the Court opined that the Espionage Act of 1917 did not violate a person rights of free speech under the First Amendment when convicted under the Act.
47) GEOFFREY R. STONE, PERILOUS TIMES: FREE SPEECH IN WARTIME FROM THE SEDITION ACT OF 1798 TO THE WAR ON TERRORISM (NY: W. W. Norton & Company, 2004)
48) Digital History, THE SEDITION ACT OF 1918, (2016), available at
http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/disp_textbook.cfm?smtID=3&psid=3903.
49) See Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project, 561 U.S. 1 (2010), available at
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/561/1/#tab-opinion-1963363. Here, the Court ruled against the Humanitarian Law Project (HLP). The HLP wanted to help the Kurdistan Workers' Party in Turkey and Sri Lanka's Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam learn how to peacefully settle conflicts.
50) EUGENE VOLOKH, THE FIRST AMENDMENT AND RELATED STATUTES: PROBLEMS, CASES AND POLICY ARGUMENTS 259 (Foundation Press, 4th ed. 2011). See a discussion of Brandenburg v. Ohio below.
51) See the definitions of these terms in 18 U.S. Code § 2339B.
52) Humanitarian Law Project, 561 U.S., supra, note 79.
53) Leviathan Thomas Hobbes Book II Chapters 20-24, Sparknotes, (n.d.), available at
http://www.sparknotes.com/philosophy/leviathan/section7/.
54) See Beauharnais, 343 U.S., supra, note 67.
55) See Terminiello v. Chicago, 337 U.S. 1 (1949), available at https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/337/1/. Here, Arthur Terminiello, a defrocked Catholic priest repeatedly attacked Jews, communists, and liberals. In February 1946, a scuffle occurred in Chicago, and Terminiello was arrested for inciting a riot.
56) Tom Head, 6 Major US Supreme Court Hate Speech Cases, THOUGHTCO., (February 19, 2018), available at https://www.thoughtco.com/hate-speech-cases-721215.
57) Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444, 447 (1969), available at https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/395/444/. Here, Clarence Brandenburg, a leader of the Ku Klux Klan (KKK) in rural Ohio, contacted a Cincinnati television station reporter, inviting him to report on a KKK rally to be held in Hamilton County in 1964. The rally was filmed, and showed men in white robes carrying guns, burning a cross, and making speeches against “Niggers,” “Jews,” and anyone else who supported them.
58) Tom Head, supra, note 87.
59) National Socialist Party v. Village of Skokie, 432 U.S. 43 (1977), available at https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/432/43/. In In 1977, Frank Collin who led the National Socialist Party of America (NSPA) at that time publicized that the NSPA wanted to march through Skokie, Illinois, mostly a Jewish community. Because of the unrest in the Jewish community the local government demanded that the NSPA post a public safety bond, and barred any demonstrations in Marquette Park.
60) Tom Head, supra, note 87.
61) R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul, 505 U.S. 377, 380 (1992), available at https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/505/377/.
62) Virginia v. Black, 538 U.S. 343 (2003), available at https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/538/343/. On May 2, 1998, and in Virginia Beach, Virginia, Richard Elliot and Jonathan O'Meara tried to burn a cross on the property Elliot's neighbor who was African American. Furthermore, on August 22, 1998 Barry Black conducted a Ku Klux Klan rally on private property. He had the consent of the owner of the property which was located in Carroll County, Virginia. Both a neighbor and the county sheriff witnessed the event, hearing racial epitaphs against African Americans. Black was arrested and charged with defying a Virginia law that made cross burnings illegal. Elliot, O’Meara, and Black were all found guilty.
63) Snyder v. Phelps, 562 U.S. 443 (2011), available at https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/562/443/. Here, Albert Snyder was a gay man whose his son, Matthew Snyder, was killed during the Iraq War while serving as a U.S. Marine. At the Matthew Snyder’s funeral, Phelps and members of the Westborough Baptist Church picketed the funeral. The Court held that the speech was protected and could not be stopped because it occurred on public property.
64) Matel, 582 U.S. ___, 2, supra, note 68. In a unanimous decision, Justice Alito, writing for the majority, boldly proclaimed that “The disparagement clause violates the First Amendment’s Free Speech Clause. Contrary to the Government’s contention, trademarks are private, not government speech.”
65) Locke, supra, note 52.
66) Kenny Cota, How did John Locke influence Thomas Jefferson?, QUORA, (November 24, 2017), available at https://www.quora.com/How-did-John-Locke-influence-Thomas-Jefferson.
67) Jim Powell, John Locke: Natural Rights to Life, Liberty, and Property, FOUNDATION FOR ECONOMIC EDUCATION, (August 1, 1996), available at https://fee.org/articles/john-locke-natural-rights-to-life-liberty-and-property/.