• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

60 organizations consider suing the SPLC for defamation

Jason Harvestdancer

Contributor
Joined
Oct 23, 2005
Messages
8,149
Location
Lots of planets have a North
Basic Beliefs
Wiccan
As a follow up to this thread it seems this interesting case is having some even more interesting follow-up.

They wound up settling out of court for labeling a practicing Muslim and reformer as an anti-Muslim extremist, which means that while there is a public precedent there isn't much of a legal precedent. OTOH, the fact that they settled for over 3 million on a mere demand letter without any litigation shows even they know how vulnerable their position was in that instance.

When people contest the SPLC's "hate" list, the SPLC uses the defense of "like, it's just our opinion, man." The problem is their "opinion" is widely cited as if it is somehow authoritative. Moreover the SPLC has been linked to violence against those one the list, such as Floyd Lee Corkins and the Family Research Council (FRC) or the DC shooter at the Republican baseball practice.

So now 60 different organizations are weighing their options with regards to defamation suits. Their suits aren't as solid as Nawaz' suit given that labeling a practicing Muslim as an anti-Muslim extremist goes a fair amount beyond laughable. Still, if these organizations do file and insist on separate suits, it does spell trouble for the SPLC hate group.
 
It does spell trouble for the SPLC. And maybe they should consider their opinions more carefully.

On the otherhand, I will wager some of those organizations considering lawsuits are snowflake hate groups.
 
It does spell trouble for the SPLC. And maybe they should consider their opinions more carefully.

On the otherhand, I will wager some of those organizations considering lawsuits are snowflake hate groups.

All this.

It’s a good question and I’ve been pondering it today after reading the OP. It’s an iffy business labeling groups as hate groups. And at the same time has some social value to keep track of the rabid dogs. But it comes with risks and they will need to be more careful.


And yeah, hate group alsoo harbor a lot of snowflakes.
 
Read the article. pjmedia is a fair and rational place for unbiased information. It certainly doesn't skew its stories or appeal to any particular ideology (like, for example conservolibertarians). I'm curious as to the who the 60 groups are who are considering suing the "left-wing smear factory", as little bit of context might help. The only other articles this story sources is other pjmedia articles, which is a bit circular also. If it is just groups like the Ruth Institute or PragerU, fuck 'em. They are hate groups, existing only to attack a particular group or ideology.
 
I only rarely hear of SPLC in American reports and articles that are pushing some sort of agenda. I don't know how independent or unbiased SPLC is. What does "Southern Poverty Law Centre" mean anyway? What was their initial focus? Are they a charity that collects money for the poor and opens soup kitchens, working with the United Way, etc? Are they a pro bono law clinic like various law schools here have?
 
I only rarely hear of SPLC in American reports and articles that are pushing some sort of agenda. I don't know how independent or unbiased SPLC is. What does "Southern Poverty Law Centre" mean anyway? What was their initial focus? Are they a charity that collects money for the poor and opens soup kitchens, working with the United Way, etc? Are they a pro bono law clinic like various law schools here have?

Refer to  Southern_Poverty_Law_Center and https://www.splcenter.org/.
 
SPLC history

It was formed in 1971, and has done much good work. Obviously they're human and make mistakes, but on the whole I think their list of hate-fueled organizations is pretty accurate.
 
Well, yeah.

Their awkward name was cobbled together in an effort to sound like they are peers of older organizations that did a LOT of good work, such as the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLS).

To establish their activist credentials they sued the KKK early in their existence. They haven't done a lot since then.

Now, aside from resting on their laurels, they are best known for their Hate Watch, a list of groups and individuals they consider to be racist, white supremacist, homophobic, misogynist, etc. Basically if you can say "I disagree with a progressive" you belong on their list. They do not describe the scholarship they use to put individuals and groups on the list, and when challenged (the way Maajid Nawaz did) they resort to "this is our opinion." Still they are treated as if they are somehow authoritative.

Their readiness to brand anyone and everyone a white supremacist or racist exceeds even the zeal of Antifa. They did reluctantly, after many years of people pointing out the blatant hypocrisy of their actions, include a few racist groups of other races. They don't have long articles detailing just how these other groups are bad, they are merely names on a list.

Even though their list is purely subjective, it is used by many others to say "surely they must be a hate group, the SPLC says so".

The other thing they are known for is fund drives, having a large amount of money at their disposal, paying their executives large salaries, and being the only public charity that seems to need offshore bank accounts.
 
Their awkward name was cobbled together in an effort to sound like they are peers of older organizations that did a LOT of good work, such as the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLS).

To establish their activist credentials they sued the KKK early in their existence. They haven't done a lot since then.
I guess it depends on what someone means by a lot. From Wikipedia (
Southern_Poverty_Law_Center
) here is a sample of some of their successes over the past 47 years of its existence
Notable cases

The Southern Poverty Law Center has initiated a number of civil cases seeking injunctive relief and monetary awards on behalf of its clients. The SPLC has said it does not accept any portion of monetary judgements.[30][31] Dees and the SPLC "have been credited with devising innovative legal ways to cripple hate groups, including seizing their assets."[32] However, this has led to criticism from some civil libertarians, who contend that the SPLC's tactics chill free speech and set legal precedents that could be applied against activist groups which are not hate groups.[18] The SPLC has also filed suits related to the conditions of incarceration for adults and juveniles.
Alabama legislature

An early SPLC case was Sims v. Amos (consolidated with Nixon v. Brewer) in which the U.S. District Court for the Middle of Alabama ordered the state legislature to reapportion its election system. The result of the decision, which was affirmed by the U.S. Supreme Court, was that 15 black legislators were elected in 1974.[33]
Vietnamese fishermen

In 1981, the SPLC took Ku Klux Klan leader Louis Beam's Klan-associated militia, the Texas Emergency Reserve (TER),[34] to court to stop racial harassment and intimidation of Vietnamese shrimpers in and around Galveston Bay.[35] The Klan's actions against approximately 100 Vietnamese shrimpers in the area included a cross burning,[36] sniper fire aimed at them, and arsonists burning their boats.[37]

In May 1981, U.S. District Court judge Gabrielle McDonald[38] issued a preliminary injunction against the Klan, requiring them to cease intimidating, threatening, or harassing the Vietnamese.[39] McDonald eventually found the TER and Beam liable for tortious interference, violations of the Sherman Antitrust Act, and of various civil rights statutes and thus permanently enjoined them against violence, threatening behavior, and other harassment of the Vietnamese shrimpers.[38] The SPLC also uncovered an obscure Texas law "that forbade private armies in that state."[40] McDonald found that Beam's organization violated it and hence ordered the TER to close its military training camp.[40]
White Patriot Party

In 1982, armed members of the Carolina Knights of the Ku Klux Klan terrorized Bobby Person, a black prison guard, and members of his family. They harassed and threatened others, including a white woman who had befriended blacks. In 1984, Person became the lead plaintiff in Person v. Carolina Knights of the Ku Klux Klan, a lawsuit brought by the SPLC in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina. The harassment and threats continued during litigation and the court issued an order prohibiting any person from interfering with others inside the courthouse.[41] In January 1985, the court issued a consent order that prohibited the group's "Grand Dragon", Frazier Glenn Miller, Jr., and his followers from operating a paramilitary organization, holding parades in black neighborhoods, and from harassing, threatening or harming any black person or white persons who associated with black persons. Subsequently, the court dismissed the plaintiffs' claim for damages.[41]

Within a year, the court found Miller and his followers, now calling themselves the White Patriot Party, in criminal contempt for violating the consent order. Miller was sentenced to six months in prison followed by a three-year probationary period, during which he was banned from associating with members of any racist group such as the White Patriot Party. Miller refused to obey the terms of his probation. He made underground "declarations of war" against Jews and the federal government before being arrested again. Found guilty of weapons violations, he went to federal prison for three years.[42][43]
United Klans of America

In 1987, SPLC won a case against the United Klans of America for the lynching of Michael Donald, a black teenager in Mobile, Alabama.[44] The SPLC used an unprecedented legal strategy of holding an organization responsible for the crimes of individual members to help produce a $7 million judgement for the victim's mother.[44] The verdict forced United Klans of America into bankruptcy. Its national headquarters was sold for approximately $52,000 to help satisfy the judgement.[45] In 1987, five members of a Klan offshoot, the White Patriot Party, were indicted for stealing military weaponry and plotting to kill Dees.[46] The SPLC has since successfully used this precedent to force numerous Ku Klux Klan and other hate groups into bankruptcy.[47]
The Civil Rights Memorial in Montgomery
White Aryan Resistance

On November 13, 1988, in Portland, Oregon, three white supremacist members of East Side White Pride and White Aryan Resistance (WAR) fatally assaulted Mulugeta Seraw, an Ethiopian man who came to the United States to attend college.[48] In October 1990, the SPLC won a civil case on behalf of Seraw's family against WAR's operator Tom Metzger and his son, John, for a total of $12.5 million.[49][50] The Metzgers declared bankruptcy, and WAR went out of business. The cost of work for the trial was absorbed by the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) as well as the SPLC.[51] As of August 2007, Metzger still makes payments to Seraw's family.[52][needs update]
Church of the Creator

In May 1991, Harold Mansfield, a black U.S. Navy war veteran, was murdered by George Loeb, a member of the neo-Nazi "Church of the Creator" (now called the Creativity Movement).[53] SPLC represented the victim's family in a civil case and won a judgement of $1 million from the church in March 1994.[54] The church transferred ownership to William Pierce, head of the National Alliance, to avoid paying money to Mansfield's heirs.[55] The SPLC filed suit against Pierce for his role in the fraudulent scheme and won an $85,000 judgement against him in 1995.[56][57] The amount was upheld on appeal and the money was collected prior to Pierce's death in 2002.[57]
Christian Knights of the KKK

The SPLC won a $37.8 million verdict on behalf of Macedonia Baptist Church, a 100-year-old black church in Manning, South Carolina, against two Ku Klux Klan chapters and five Klansmen (Christian Knights of the Ku Klux Klan and Invisible Empire, Inc.) in July 1998.[58] The money was awarded stemming from arson convictions; these Klan units burned down the historic black church in 1995.[59] Morris Dees told the press, "If we put the Christian Knights out of business, what's that worth? We don't look at what we can collect. It's what the jury thinks this egregious conduct is worth that matters, along with the message it sends." According to The Washington Post the amount is the "largest-ever civil award for damages in a hate crime case."[60]
Aryan Nations

In September 2000, the SPLC won a $6.3 million judgement against the Aryan Nations (AN) from an Idaho jury who awarded punitive and compensatory damages to a woman and her son who were attacked by Aryan Nations guards.[6] The lawsuit stemmed from the July 1998 attack when security guards at the Aryan Nations compound near Hayden Lake in northern Idaho, shot at Victoria Keenan and her son.[61] Bullets struck their car several times, causing the car to crash. An Aryan Nations member held the Keenans at gunpoint.[61] As a result of the judgement, Richard Butler turned over the 20-acre (81,000 m2) compound to the Keenans, who sold the property to a philanthropist. He donated the land to North Idaho College, which designated the area as a "peace park".[62]
Ten Commandments monument
See also: Roy Moore § Ten Commandments monument controversy

In 2002, the SPLC and the American Civil Liberties Union filed suit (Glassroth v. Moore) against Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore for placing a display of the Ten Commandments in the rotunda of the Alabama Judicial Building. Moore, who had final authority over what decorations were to be placed in the Alabama State Judicial Building's Rotunda, had installed a 5,280 pound (2,400 kg) granite block, three feet wide by three feet deep by four feet tall, of the Ten Commandments late at night without the knowledge of any other court justice. After defying several court rulings, Moore was eventually removed from the court and the Supreme Court justices had the monument removed from the building.[63]

.......

Billy Ray Johnson

The SPLC brought a civil suit on behalf of Billy Ray Johnson, a black, mentally disabled man, who was severely beaten by four white males in Texas and left bleeding in a ditch, suffering permanent injuries. In 2007, Johnson was awarded $9 million in damages by a Linden, Texas jury.[66][67] At a criminal trial, the four men were convicted of assault and received sentences of 30 to 60 days in county jail.[68][69]

.....
Mississippi correctional institutions
Further information: Walnut Grove Youth Correctional Facility and East Mississippi
Correctional Facility

Together with the ACLU National Prison Project, the SPLC filed a class-action suit in November 2010 against the owner/operators of the private Walnut Grove Youth Correctional Facility in Leake County, Mississippi, and the Mississippi Department of Corrections (MDC). They charged that conditions, including under-staffing and neglect of medical care, produced numerous and repeated abuses of youthful prisoners, high rates of violence and injury, and that one prisoner suffered brain damage because of inmate-on-inmate attacks.[73] A federal civil rights investigation was undertaken by the United States Department of Justice. In settling the suit, Mississippi ended its contract with GEO Group in 2012. Additionally, under the court decree, the MDC moved the youthful offenders to state-run units. In 2012, Mississippi opened a new youthful offender unit at the Central Mississippi Correctional Facility in Rankin County.[74] The state also agreed to not subject youthful offenders to solitary confinement and a court monitor conducted regular reviews of conditions at the facility.[75]

Also with the ACLU Prison Project, the SPLC filed a class-action suit in May 2013 against Management and Training Corporation (MTC), the for-profit operator of the private East Mississippi Correctional Facility, and the MDC.[76] Management and Training Corporation had been awarded a contract for this and two other facilities in Mississippi in 2012 following the removal of GEO Group. The suit charged failure of MTC to make needed improvements, and to maintain proper conditions and treatment for this special needs population of prisoners.[77] In 2015 the court granted the plaintiffs' motion for class certification.[78][needs update]
.......
Andrew Anglin and The Daily Stormer

In April 2017, the SPLC filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of Tanya Gersh, accusing Andrew Anglin, publisher of the white supremacist website The Daily Stormer, of instigating an anti-Semitic harassment campaign against Gersh, a Whitefish, Montana, real estate agent.[83][84]



Now, aside from resting on their laurels, they are best known for their Hate Watch, a list of groups and individuals they consider to be racist, white supremacist, homophobic, misogynist, etc. Basically if you can say "I disagree with a progressive" you belong on their list. They do not describe the scholarship they use to put individuals and groups on the list, and when challenged (the way Maajid Nawaz did) they resort to "this is our opinion."
What constitutes a "hate group" is a matter of opinion. But few decent human beings would disagree that groups like Atomwaffen Division and other neo-nazis are hate groups.

The SPLC ought to be careful in forming its opinions, and they may make mistakes, but to dismiss them outright is careless thinking.
 
The SPLC ought to be careful in forming its opinions, and they may make mistakes, but to dismiss them outright is careless thinking.

I'm not saying that they don't put genuine hate groups on their list. I am saying they also put other groups on the list with careless abandon.

Thus the potential lawsuits they are facing.
 
The SPLC ought to be careful in forming its opinions, and they may make mistakes, but to dismiss them outright is careless thinking.

I'm not saying that they don't put genuine hate groups on their list. I am saying they also put other groups on the list with careless abandon.

Seeing as 60 might be considering the possibility of maybe suing, it shouldn't be so hard for you to name three groups that fall into this category. Where are the victims of this left wing smear factory? Considering the only other "news" outlet that seems to be running this story is World Nut Daily, I suspect that this is very much agenda driven. Especially as the one verifiable instance listed in either article of SPLC wrongdoing in the last 46 years is what happened to Maajid Nawaz.

Edit: Oh, and there is an op-ed floating about written by Marc Thiessen. All this story needs is Tucker Carlson feigning outrage over it and it ticks all the boxes.

I mentioned this before; is anyone else curious as to who these 60 organisations are who feel they have been maligned by the SPLC? Why aren't they being more vocal about there mistreatment?
 
I mentioned this before; is anyone else curious as to who these 60 organisations are who feel they have been maligned by the SPLC? Why aren't they being more vocal about there mistreatment?

I'm curious. Sixty completely different organizations sounds like a lot. I wonder how many of them are the same groups forming and re-forming Klan and Neo-Nazi chapters under different names, trying to shake the 'hate group' designation and court ordered payments.
 
The SPLC ought to be careful in forming its opinions, and they may make mistakes, but to dismiss them outright is careless thinking.

The basic problem with the SPLC is mission creep. The people running an organization that accomplishes it's objective don't like to disband as they lose their status and their jobs if that happens. The SPLC has taken the path of branching out looking for a mission and it's pretty much become supporting the left even against those who simply oppose it but aren't extremists.
 
The SPLC ought to be careful in forming its opinions, and they may make mistakes, but to dismiss them outright is careless thinking.

The basic problem with the SPLC is mission creep. The people running an organization that accomplishes it's objective don't like to disband as they lose their status and their jobs if that happens. The SPLC has taken the path of branching out looking for a mission and it's pretty much become supporting the left even against those who simply oppose it but aren't extremists.

Where the fuck is the left wing version of Arthur Jones? Or Patrick Little? You're right about mission creep. You're dead wrong about where it is coming from. The SPLC shouldn't feel obligated to move its goalposts simply because the right is openly pandering to hate groups.
 
To establish their activist credentials they sued the KKK early in their existence. They haven't done a lot since then.

As laughing dog showed, they actually have done a lot since then.

I will add that as a Libertarian it is interesting you want to get them to stop talking using their free speech against conservative hate groups. Why does this story interest you as a Libertarian?
 
To establish their activist credentials they sued the KKK early in their existence. They haven't done a lot since then.

I will add that as a Libertarian it is interesting you want to get them to stop talking using their free speech against conservative hate groups. Why does this story interest you as a Libertarian?

So you think freedom of speech means no repercussions for your speech?
 
To establish their activist credentials they sued the KKK early in their existence. They haven't done a lot since then.

I will add that as a Libertarian it is interesting you want to get them to stop talking using their free speech against conservative hate groups. Why does this story interest you as a Libertarian?

So you think freedom of speech means no repercussions for your speech?

Usually Libertarian repercussions mean not doing business with the organization you object to. Free market and all.
 
The SPLC ought to be careful in forming its opinions, and they may make mistakes, but to dismiss them outright is careless thinking.

The basic problem with the SPLC is mission creep. The people running an organization that accomplishes it's objective don't like to disband as they lose their status and their jobs if that happens. The SPLC has taken the path of branching out looking for a mission and it's pretty much become supporting the left even against those who simply oppose it but aren't extremists.

Where the fuck is the left wing version of Arthur Jones? Or Patrick Little? You're right about mission creep. You're dead wrong about where it is coming from. The SPLC shouldn't feel obligated to move its goalposts simply because the right is openly pandering to hate groups.

The problem is not all their targets are hate groups.
 
Especially as the one verifiable instance listed in either article of SPLC wrongdoing in the last 46 years is what happened to Maajid Nawaz.
The SPLC also had Ayaan Hirsi Ali on its list.
 
Back
Top Bottom