The questionable case brought by the U.S. Department of Justice against the Southern Poverty Law Center survived its first motion to dismiss after a Donald Trump-appointed federal judge allowed the case to proceed Monday.
The Montgomery-based SPLC, known for its groundbreaking work defending the poor and persecuted minorities and shining a spotlight on hate groups, had asked U.S. District Judge Emily Marks to dismiss the case on the basis of vindictive prosecution. The SPLC claimed in its filing that the prosecution is a direct result of animosity from the Trump administration over the organization’s work exposing many Trump supporters, and some Trump staffers, as racists or tied to racist organizations.
While not discounting those claims, Marks said the SPLC’s filing failed to show a clear connection between the Trump administration’s animosity and the DOJ prosecutors who ultimately chose to bring the case against the SPLC. However, Marks also denied a motion from the SPLC asking for leeway to investigate that connection.
The case against the SPLC, which two former DOJ prosecutors have called “utterly meritless,” centers on payments the organization made to confidential informants within some hate groups, including the KKK. The DOJ alleged those payments constitute wire fraud and defrauding investors—in this case, donors who contributed to the SPLC without knowing their donations would be used to pay informants.
The SPLC has argued that those informants provided both the SPLC and law enforcement officials with critical information about planned violent attacks and that the information saved lives. A source familiar with the SPLC’s informant program told APR recently that information gathered from one such source stopped a planned assassination attempt on a high-profile figure in Montgomery several years ago. The source said there have been numerous other examples of similar situations.
Still, a grand jury in Montgomery issued the indictment, and the SPLC has since pleaded not guilty.
It is the latest in a series of questionable, possibly politically motivated indictments brought by the Trump DOJ. That includes an indictment brought against former U.S. Olympian David Hearn for supposedly damaging the Lincoln Memorial’s reflecting pool. The indictment was celebrated among right-wing media and the Trump White House, only for the DOJ to ultimately dismiss the charges against Hearn and admit that there was no evidence he committed any crime.
Most legal experts expect the case against the SPLC to end in a similar fashion. Numerous former prosecutors have called the charges “lacking” and said they have “glaring omissions” that undermine the case. The Society for the Rule of Law, a conservative and libertarian organization of attorneys, has even filed an amicus brief in the case supporting the SPLC’s claim of vindictive prosecution and raising serious questions about the validity of the charges.
