People convicted of crimes related to domestic extremism face far shorter prison terms than those convicted in international terrorism cases, even when the crimes are similar, a new report on the outcomes of hundreds of federal criminal cases has found.
The first-of-its-kind analysis, completed by terrorism researchers at the University of Maryland, was provided exclusively to The Associated Press. It comes after federal officials and researchers have repeatedly identified domestic violent extremists such as white supremacists and anti-government groups as the most significant terror threat to the U.S. And it follows scrutiny of the outcomes of Jan. 6 cases, including for some Oath Keepers and Proud Boys who received sentences years lower than what was called for by prosecutors and sentencing guidelines.
Stewart Rhodes, founder of the Oath Keepers, speaks June 25, 2017, during a rally outside the White House. Prosecutors had requested 25 years in prison for Rhodes in a Jan. 6 case; he was sentenced in May to 18 years. A study released Wednesday found those convicted of crimes related to domestic extremism face far shorter prison terms than those convicted in international terrorism cases.
President Joe Biden has echoed the concerns about domestic terrorism, calling it a “stain on the soul of America” and the “most urgent terrorism threat” faced by the country, yet the new analysis shows that on average, domestic extremists receive more lenient penalties.
People are also reading…
“This research is significant in confirming empirically what many have long argued: international terrorism cases are sentenced more harshly than domestic cases, even when the conduct is the same, and that these disparities are due to a combination of differences in the law and biases in implementing them,” said Shirin Sinnar, a professor at Stanford Law School, who was not involved in the research.
Researchers at the University of Maryland’s National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism, or START, and its Center for Health and Homeland Security examined federal criminal cases between 2014 and 2019 that were brought against people radicalized in the U.S. who were pursuing political, social, economic or religious goals.
International terrorism cases were defined by the researchers as those in which the defendants had links to or were acting in support of terrorist groups or movements based outside the U.S., while domestic cases involved defendants connected to groups or movements that operate primarily inside the U.S.
The analysis looked at 344 cases, including 118 international cases and 226 domestic cases, and found the disparities are caused by multiple factors, including the charges federal prosecutors choose to file, the laws that are on the books, as well as the sentencing decisions made by judges.
Jan. 6 cases are not included in the analysis, which has not yet been peer-reviewed. START’s Michael Jensen, a principal investigator of the study, said 2019 was chosen as a cutoff to ensure final outcomes of even the most complex cases were captured. Still, he said, sentencing gaps in the Jan. 6 cases that he’s analyzed also reflect this disparity. Federal prosecutors have even taken the rare step of appealing the sentences of some Jan. 6 defendants, including leaders of the Oath Keepers and Proud Boys, some of whose sentences were years below what federal sentencing guidelines had laid out.
START’s analysis found wide disparities in prison terms for similar conduct, which were most pronounced in certain kinds of cases. The largest was in cases where defendants plotted violent attacks that ultimately failed or were foiled, where international defendants received an average prison sentence of 11.2 years, compared with 1.6 years for domestic defendants.
For violent cases that led to injuries, domestic defendants received on average 8.6 years, versus 34.6 for international defendants. The disparity was smaller, but still significant, in violent fatal attacks with domestic cases at about 28.8 years and international cases at about 39.2 years.
Even terms of supervision after prison showed differences, with people charged in domestic cases getting an average of 3.5 years, compared with more than 19 years supervision for international terrorism defendants. The researchers at START point out that this is despite evidence that the recidivism rate is about 50 percent for domestic extremists — about the same rate for all federal offenders — and “vanishingly low” for international terror defendants.
START controlled for factors already known to contribute to sentencing disparities, such as race, gender, criminal history and the use of so-called sentencing enhancements that increase the possible prison time for certain crimes. Even accounting for these other factors, international defendants still receive harsher punishments on average.
Pete Simi, a Chapman University sociologist who has studied extremism for decades, said the imbalance in treatment of domestic and international cases reflects differences in the broader criminal justice system.
Federal law makes a distinction between international and domestic terrorism. The State Department has formally designated dozens of groups operating abroad as foreign terror organizations and even marginal support to such groups that doesn’t result in violence can be punishable by up to 20 years in prison. There is no comparable designation for domestic extremists such as the Proud Boys, Atomwaffen or other groups with a history of violent plots and acts.
Sinnar, who has written extensively about terrorism cases, said the disparities are indicative of numerous biases throughout the criminal justice system.
“At least for Muslims, many cases that might be labeled ‘failed or foiled’ plots were likely plots generated by government informants trying to goad individuals into crimes in the first place, and then foil them in order to arrest the supposed perpetrators,” Sinnar wrote.
David Williams, center, is led by police officers from a federal building May 21, 2009, in New York after being arrested on charges related to a bombing plot with three others in the Bronx. A federal judge in March 2023 freed Williams and two others convicted in a post-9/11 terrorism sting after deeming their lengthy sentences “unduly harsh and unjust.”
“It’s exactly in these ‘preventative’ cases where you would expect to see the biggest differences — as opposed to the rarer cases that actually lead to fatalities, in which homicide charges are available regardless of the international/domestic distinction.”
Indeed, a federal judge in March freed three men convicted in a post-9/11 terrorism sting after deeming their lengthy sentences “unduly harsh and unjust.” The judge decried the FBI’s role in radicalizing them in a plot to blow up New York synagogues and shoot down National Guard planes, and reduced their mandatory minimum 25-year prison sentences imposed in 2011 to time served plus 90 days.
Photos: Oath Keepers founder’s path to Jan. 6 Capitol riot
Stewart Rhodes, founder of the citizen militia group known as the Oath Keepers, speaks during a rally outside the White House in Washington on June 25, 2017. Rhodes formally launched the Oath Keepers in Lexington, Massachusetts, on April 19, 2009, where the first shot in the American Revolution was fired.
This image provided by Tasha Adams shows Oath Keepers founder Stewart Rhodes wearing camouflage gear in a training camp in Idaho. (Tasha Adams via AP)
This image provided by Tasha Adams shows Oath Keepers founder Stewart Rhodes speaking at a parade in Kalispell, Mont., on July 4, 2013. (Tasha Adams via AP)
This image provided by Tasha Adams shows Oath Keepers founder Stewart Rhodes with Oath Keepers members in California in 2014. (Tasha Adams via AP)
A video showing Stewart Rhodes speaking during an interview with the Jan. 6 Committee is shown at the House select committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol, hearing June 9, 2022, on Capitol Hill in Washington. (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik)
Jason Van Tatenhove, a former spokesman for the Oath Keepers, testifies as the House select committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol holds a hearing at the Capitol in Washington, July 12, 2022. A membership fee was a requirement to access the website, where people could join discussion forums, read Stewart Rhodes’ writing and hear pitches to join militaristic trainings. Members willing to go armed to a standoff numbered in the low dozens, though, said Jason Van Tatenhove. (AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin)
Stewart Rhodes, founder of the citizen militia group known as the Oath Keepers, center, speaks during a rally outside the White House in Washington, on June 25, 2017. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh)
This image provided by Tasha Adams shows an Oath Keepers sign in the yard of a home outside Eureka, Mont., in 2013. (Tasha Adams via AP)
This post was originally published on this site be sure to check out more of their content.