This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Here are a few that I'm thinking of:
Assaulting, Resisting, or Impeding (18 U.S.C. § 111)
This statue criminalizes any act to "forcibly assault, resist, oppose, impede, intimidate, or interfere with" a federal officer while they are performing their official duties. Even without physical contact, acts that "impede" or "intimidate" can be prosecuted as misdemeanors (up to 1 year in prison). If the harassment involves physical contact or the intent to commit another felony, it becomes a felony (up to 8 years in prison). If a weapon is used or serious injury occurs (like throwing an ice brick at someone), the penalty increases to up to 20 years.
People are definitely trying to impede Federal officers. They think they're "unarresting" people.. They actually succeed sometimes. This woman is here on camera saying that she harrassed federal agents in the process of arresting someone until they let the person go. She says, "dozens more [daily arrests] would be happening if it wasn't for the organized way that my community is showing up to stop these ICE agents. And we're scaring them."
I couldn't have written a better confession to this and the crimes below if I tried.
Influencing or Injuring an Officer (18 U.S.C. § 1503)
This law makes it a crime to "endeavor to influence, intimidate, or impede" any officer of a U.S. court through threats or force. The key here is the "corrupt intent" to interfere with the due administration of the law. It is generally punishable by up to 10 years in prison.
Typically ICE would not be considered officers of the court. However, this statue may apply if the harassment is intended to influence a case currently in immigration court.
Federal Stalking (18 U.S.C. § 2261A)
If the harassment involves a "course of conduct" (repeated acts) that places an officer or their family in reasonable fear of death or serious injury, it falls under federal stalking laws if any of these people are coming from out of state. This is typically a felony carrying up to 5 years, but can be much higher if bodily injury or death results.
A coordinated conspiracy to stalk and harass federal officers significantly escalates the legal consequences. When multiple people work together to interfere with federal law enforcement, the government can move beyond individual harassment charges and use powerful conspiracy and obstruction statutes.
In a conspiracy, every member can be held legally responsible for the actions of their co-conspirators, even if they weren't personally present for every act of harassment. One could argue that this is overpowered, surely not everyone on the Signal chat is intentionally committing a felony. Never the less, here's the law:
Conspiracy to Impede or Injure an Officer (18 U.S.C. § 372)
This is the most direct statute for the Signal chat. It specifically targets groups (two or more people) who conspire to prevent a federal officer from performing their duties through force, intimidation, or threats. The penalty is up to 6 years in prison, plus fines.
General Conspiracy to Defraud the U.S. (18 U.S.C. § 371)
While "defraud" sounds like financial crime, the "defraud clause" of this statute is broad. It covers any conspiracy to obstruct, interfere with, or impair the lawful functions of any federal agency. Working together to "defeat the lawful function" of the government (e.g., preventing the ICE or CBP from enforcing laws) carries a penalty of up to 5 years in prison.
Obstruction of Justice (18 U.S.C. §§ 1512(d)(3))
If the harassment is aimed at officers involved in an active investigation or court proceeding, it can be charged as obstruction.
Which leads us to:
If the group is highly organized and engages in a "pattern of racketeering activity" (which can include threats, or obstruction of justice), they could face charges under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act. RICO can put people in prison for 20 years per count.
(Full Disclosure, I used Gemini to get the list together but I checked each statue to make sure there are no hallucinations and that I'm willing to defend the applicability of each one. Then I edited the output so it's mostly my words where it isn't US Code verbatim.)
I'll caveat that, in addition to various legal penumbras and interpretations that might make a frictionless-cow-spherical-plane model of these laws complicated to bring to bear, there's a more direct issue where the law is enforced by a system, and the system does not want to accept charges even where the crime was clear and documented.
Yes, I wonder how this was resolved in the South when federal law forbade segregation.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link