tv Key Capitol Hill Hearings CSPAN October 14, 2015 10:00am-12:01pm EDT
-- them only humane treatment, but --" caller: we have been criminals ever since they took us from africa, kidnapped us, and incarcerated us on the plantation. the emancipation proclamation did not free us. we didn't get any land. what we got was further incarceration. host: professor, go ahead. guest: i think there are grave injustices, but it's worth noting that most victims of black criminals are black victims. most crime is interracial. -- intraracial. the community can't stand having gang members killing their own people. the has to be forgiving -- there has to be forgiveness. agree, job treatment and other
constructive things are what we ought to be aiming at when someone is in jail. ast: stephanos bibas, contributor to national review. nationalreview.com to read more. thank you for your time this morning. guest: thank you. host: that does it for today's "washington journal." now we bring you to george washington university. the topic is domestic terrorism. john carlin will be talking about the issue. put together by george washington university's center on cyber and homeland security. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org]
>> john carlin's assistant attorney general for national security. we are live at george washington university. we understand the event will be getting underway later than planned. probably at 10:10 eastern. clerics andncil of officials in iran have approved implementing the landmark nuclear deal with the west. the associated press says state tv reports the guardian council gave the final approval to a bill passed by parliament to permit the deal. a report from the associated
press. this morning will hear from john carlin. lots of politics. coverage with marco rubio at 12:30 on c-span. eastern at 7:00 p.m. and on the democratic side, hillary clinton will rally in las vegas. evening, dollis trunk holds a rally in virginia. -- donald trump hosts a rally in virginia. >>-- donald good morning everyb. program director of the . it is a pleasure to hold such an important event today and see how many people showed up. we are glad for the attendance.
outfit wem is a new launched a few months ago in june 2015. we seek to spearhead an empirically based nonpartisan extremism. we provide solutions based on research and analysis and try to be a constructive force in the debate. assistantored to host attorney general of national security, john carlin. he has been very kind to accept our invitation to be here today. issues that are very important to security.
let me also give thanks to the people who made the event extremism a rich history in spearheading the debate on extremism. i would like to knowledge the team that has made the event possible at gw. all of us have worked hard but i would like to acknowledge shamus hughes, one of the main driving forces behind the center. it is my pleasure to introduce mr. carlin, the department of top attorney who is responsible for protecting the country against international and domestic terrorism and other security threats. as chief oferved staff to fbi director robert
mueller. esther carlin previously served as the official coordinator of the doj's intellectual property program and is an assistant to the u.s. attorney for the district of columbia. mr. carlin will speak for about half an hour and heidi will provide commentary and answer questions and we will open it to the floor for questions to mr. carlin. i would urge everybody to ask short questions. will moderate the questions and to ask questions that are not commentaries provide dish disguised as questions. we like to have everybody speak to the microphone. i would like to acknowledge media presence. someone will go around with the microphone. without further do, and queue again for coming in the four -- i would like to thank you again for coming. the floor is yours. mr. carlin: thank you for having
me today. this is a subject of great importance that does not get discussed as much as it should. i want to start by going back to a period in time when i was at the fbi. it was january 17 2011. , butively cold day in dc in seattle it was relatively warm and dry and it was a march to celebrate unity and bringing people together on behalf of martin luther king jr.. over 2000 people were prepared to march together in that spirit of peace and unity across cultures. there is an individual that day who had a different view and goal and was motivated not by bringing people together by hate. what that individual did is he worked to construct an explosive device and he took care. it was a pipe bomb. he put gunpowder inside the pipe
am. he bought fishing weights designed to use ash shrapnel -- to use as shrapnel to cause as much pain as he could to those marching in the spirit of unity. he put rat poison onto the shrapnel as an anticoagulant so people would leave more what -- bleed more. that improvised explosive device did not go off because a worker at the parade spot the backpack in which it was enclosed. after the spotted that backpack, alert members of the police and joint terrorism task force worked to disable it. investigation ensued. i was at the fbi the time and when that type of investigation takes place in a full attention of the director and the men and women of the fbi and those on states and locals. hundreds of agents were able to figure out who did it in part by getting dna of the backpack but
also by doing brick and mortar pounding the pavement going to store after store to find the receipts of the individual who bought those fishing weight shrapnel. they were able to bring kevin ham to justice. i was the fbi where we were not meeting the national security council with our partners in the cia and nsa and it was not a case that involved a foreign terrorist group. it was someone who was motivated by mites of her miss -- motivated by white supremacist and developed those elites. we did not -- those beliefs. we do not have the tools and structure in place to hold accountable that individual as we do for international terrorism. i was reminded of the real stakes. that was a bomb that did not go off but this near -- this year
marked 20th anniversary of the oklahoma city bombings. that memorialnd along with many u.s. attorneys across the country who are dedicated and have an expertise in preventing terrorism. when i was at that event, it was in originally beautiful day and there was a slight rain cloud that came over us as we watched the memorial. if you have not been there it is a moving site. one thing they have is instead of a normal tombstone they have little chairs to represent the children. little kids who lost their lives when a day care center was bombed as part of those attacks. i remember president clinton speaking at the memorial. one thing you saw was how raw the pain was for the parents who lost children that day. it does not go away 20 years later. they don't forget.
it is still raw when you bring back those remembrances. i heard president clinton say as only he can do, how he went to check on his grandchild that night before delivering those remarks with hillary and he looked at her in her crib and he did it to remind himself and tried to feel what those parents must be feeling when their kids up and taken from them 20 years ago. that is why the work you're doing is so important. two months after that event where the shootings in charleston. if it was not in our minds and then, and it was, that this is a real threat. that is cost more lives than international terrorism is cost post-9/11, that should have been a vivid reminder of why we do a we do and why it's important to do it. is standingh as gw up and why it is important to have groups at the southern poverty law center keeping track of what is going on inside the united states.
of leading the national security division, we're one of the divisions that stood up -- the reason for our creation was taking a look at what had happened on 9/11 and deciding there were things we can do better. we had a wall that prevented proper sharing of information between the intelligence side of the house and law enforcement side of the house. we needed to tear down that house -- tear down that wall. our division was created to take a look at terrorism threats across the spectrum and have our lawyers, prosecutors, sit in one place dedicated to one goal, protecting national security of the united states. it is a busy time on terrorism. there is a lot of focus on the international terrorist threat right now. the group islamic state in the
lavon and the deteriorating situation in syria and iraq has caused individuals not just in the united states but across the world to travel to that region to join a foreign terrorist organization and commit atrocities that range from using rape and slavery as social tools to the indiscriminate killing of civilians. that needs to be a top priority for the division and because of , the use ofeat social media, we have seen it hit our shores. to date we have brought around 60 cases -- criminal cases across the country. the fbi will say there are 50. they have investigations related to that thread in all 50 states. we brought cases to date in over 25 different districts across the country. we are not seeing it can find by ethnichy or particular
groups. least 10een at instances or brought criminal cases for those inspired by the yellow g to commit tax -- ideology to commit attacks in the united states. because of that, there is less time spent focusing on those groups who are not motivated by an ideology that emanates overseas but one that is overhere. we cannot lose sight of the domestic terrorism threat posed by other extremists. terror and extremism do not always originate elsewhere or take place outside our borders. homegrown extremists can be motivated by any viewpoint. antigovernment views, racism, .narchy and other beliefs
when a comes to hate and intolerance there is no single ideology that governs. in america, harboring extremist views is not itself a crime. it is not the expression of a hateful ideology or association with a particular hateful group. what we do focus on is that line between speech and violence in it is crossed often results in tragedy. the list includes attacks on government buildings, businesses and the synagogues, mosques, and other of which cultures. planned assassinations of police officer's, judges, doctors, and others. it includes the stockpiling of and killingons sprees that have terrorized local communities. looking back over the past few years it is clear that domestic terrorists and homegrown violent extremists remain a clear and
present danger. we recognize that according to at least one study more people died in this country in attacks by domestic extremists than attacks associated with international terrorist groups in the last five to six years. hatred motivates many of these violent extremist attacks and the attorney general noted this summer that these kinds of hate crimes are the original domestic terrorism. among domestic extremists movements in the united states, the white supremacists are among the most violent. the trust and shooter who had a manifesto -- the trust and shooter -- the charleston shooter who had a manifesto is one example. hartham waskevin successfully disrupted. we are not always so fortunate. weight michael page -- wade
michael page fatally shot six people and wounded four others including a responding police officer at a sikh temple in wisconsin. he acted alone and died in the course of the attack of a self-inflicted gunshot wound. we see antigovernment views triggering violence throughout america. three militia members were recently sentenced in georgia for conspiring to use weapons of mass destruction in attacks against federal government buildings. they attempted to acquire explosives in early 2014 with the goal of destroying u.s. .overnment infrastructure more broadly, law enforcement agencies across the nation are concerned about the growth of sovereign citizen movement. according to one 2014 study, state, local, and tribal local law enforcement officials
consider sovereign citizens to be their top concern and it right above isil or al qaeda inspired extremism. these adherents to the sovereign citizen ideology believed the do not have to answer to government authority including law enforcement. although most sovereign citizens a spouse these views lawfully as they are entitled, some resort to violence. , the convicted accomplice in the oklahoma city bombing, is believed by many to have viewed himself as a member of the sovereign citizen movement. killed twojerry kane police officers and themselves were killed in an ensuing shootout. in june 2014, judd and amanda miller likely motivated by the
sovereign antigovernment ideology killed two las vegas metropolitan police officers. another innocent person and during their attacks they declare the beginning of the so-called revolution. these attacks and others are reasons why we at the department of justice and elsewhere including groups like southern poverty law center and gw but all the government agencies that confront these groups and those of you in the community, it tells us why we need to do it -- need to rededicate ourselves to prevent events like witnessing the pain at the memorial the oklahoma city bombing. one might think there are no commonalities but we do see commonalities among those in wish to do us harm. this gives us important information as we try to come up with disruption strategies. across the spectrum of the extremist ideology, related
traits emerge. ehe prevalence of so-called lon offender attacks. the second phenomenon is the increasing number of disaffected people inspired to violent to communicate their hate filled views over the internet through social media. both of these traits are present in the threat proposed by isil. travelake it harder to to join the foreign terrorist isup, we are seeing isil explicitly calling on people to commit attacks inspired by their ideology but here inside the united states. no passport or travel required. seen asult, we have surge in the number of criminal cases entering our justice system. unlike al qaeda. a tightly controlled membership
and carefully planned over years large-scale attacks as part of its strategy. isil actively encourages loan offenders and takes credit even for failed attacks. this may be a relatively new approach or tactic when it comes to international terrorism but unfortunately it is too familiar for those of us who have been confronting violent extremism where the label it domestic terrorism, hate crimes, or murder. lone offenders or small groups often played in carry out attacks with limited assistance. few others know of their plans making their plotting more difficult to disrupt. across the spectrum of extremist ideologies we see a new trend, the number of people -- disaffected people linked together because of their adherence to violence through the internet and social media.
reveals thesereat new communication technologies including social media and the use of encryption, post challenges to national security and public safety and there are challenges in which everyone who has a stake in the matter must work to address. citizensvereign continue to use and recruit and communicate through youtube and twitter. white supremacists post to social media. violence begets violence. through the power of the internet a meeting hall is no longer needed. former organizational structures are necessary. messages spread all through the pressing of a button. fortunately by recognizing these common patterns we can craft a common response. the matter who is behind the violence and intimidation, we
will use every lawful tool to deter and disrupt this threat. we will do all we can to diffuse those who would engage in large-scale acts of violence. , wechieve these objectives are working on improving coordination between ,nvestigations and prosecutions utilizing the same all legal tool approach we also use against all other natural -- national security threats and exploring options to address the sources of violent extremism. we will talk about some of the things we are doing in the department but there are areas where it is important to have the involvement of academia studying these threats of having nonprofit groups who are willing to continue to examine and discuss what these groups are saying and doing even of a received death threats as a response to their efforts. domesticn disrupting
terrorism requires closed coordination. conduct does not know jurisdictional bounds. at the department of justice our goal is to ensure that coordination is as efficient as possible on something that cuts across so many different statutes and expertise. our counterterrorism section within our division maintains contact with the u.s. attorney's offices across the country for the purpose of our tale -- for the purpose of terrorism matters and to maintain an expertise on statute used in prosecutions. the national security division along with the fbi in a representative from the u.s. attorneys community, we cochair the domestic terrorism executive committee. this was a committee that was originally formed by attorney general janet reno in response to the oklahoma city bombings with the goal of ensuring that
there was a forum to talk about the different ways these domestic terrorism events and actors cut across statutes and expertise of the department. it was actually scheduled to meet on september 11, two dozen one. -- september 11 2001. we reestablished it and started tec up again last june. a civil rights division along with many others across the federal law enforcement spectrum who work on domestic terrorism matters. as it originally did, it serves as a forum to share information about the trends we see across the leadership level and within the federal law-enforcement community and to ensure national level coordination. this is a threat that requires
as much as any other. not just a federal response to working closely with police officers, local community officials, and members of the community. in order to ensure that we gain the benefits of information and input coming in from all of those different eyes on the ground and in recognition of the growing number of domestic terrorism matters across the country and across all of the states, we have created a new position to assist in our important work in combating domestic terrorism. just this states week, i appoina new council to serve as our main point of contact for u.s. attorneys working on domestic terrorism matters. the new domestic terrorism council will not only ensure that cases are properly coordinated but will play a key role in our headquarters' efforts to identify trends, shape national strategy and
analyze legal gaps or enhancements required to ensure we can come at these threats. the new council will play an in inant role providing members with overviews of cases and trends from around the country. working together, our objective is to disrupt and prevent terrorist attacks. a successful result is not in prosecution although they are sometimes necessary. it is that we see the attack prevented, the injury that never occurs. we need to use all the investigative tools at our disposal and we need to do so aware that perhaps more so than any other area in which we operate, we need to be mindful of civil liberties and fundamental values. we do not investigate people for exercising their first amendment rights. we are obligated to investigate extremist groups and individuals
when we have reason to believe that they are involved in the commission of a federal crime including crimes of violence. we need to unify's best utilize -- utilize techniques including undercover operation, the use of confidential informants and other statutory authorities to stay ahead of the threat. undertaken with oversight and appropriate respect for civil rights and liberties, these tools can and have been highly effective. we have used them with success for many years and they have become globally recognized as people moved to confront the international terrorist threat. they have been recognized as invaluable in the fight against terrorism and organized crime. you need to make sure that someone who is talking the talk is willing to take that step to walk the walk. an undercover operation, you see whether this is someone who is willing to follow through and
kill or maim others. we can only track threats we can see. with the explosive use of social media and encrypted communications, we run the risk that we will see less as the bad guys are seeing more. social media in this space can create aforeign -- can radicalization echo chamber. each of their own calls for checking this propaganda or violence echo and support the others. i know that is a phenomenon southern poverty center has analyzed. as service providers who provide a service that does so much good and has so many legitimate is this an entertainment purposes and is the way most of our children are communicating and playing day-to-day, as it provides those good things they need to take responsibility for how services can be abused.
responsible providers need to understand what the threats are and work within their own terms to take action to prevent groups from exploiting a service that is not meant for them to induce recruits to commit terrorist attacks. when we become aware of ,xtremist criminal activity investigation and prosecution is while the most powerful tools in our toolbox. in the wake of the oklahoma city bombing, congress passed the so-called antiterrorism and effective death penalty act in 1996. part of that legislation are critical to our fight against terrorism. on the domestic front, this is some confusion. the codebook defines domestic terrorism as illegal activities that are dangerous to human life and take place primarily here in -- united states and intend and appear to be intended to
intimidate or coerce a civilian population, influence the policy of government by intimidation or affect the conduct of a government. what causes some of the confusion is that is not a particular offense that we can charge as domestic terrorism. instead, the use of that definition can be used to use certain tools and for things like sentencing enhancements. when we are confronting the offense itself, we have the whole criminal code at our disposal. over the years we have charged violent extremists with a variety of crimes ranging from explosive offenses to arson threats or fraud. we will continue to increase our focus using the full range of authorities to protect the public against these threats. provided for certain enhancements for certain
.errorism related enhancements a federal offense prohibited the possession of stolen explosives. that continues to be a significant tool in keeping dangerous explosives out of the hands of those who would use them for violent ends. through the leadership of senator dianne feinstein, congress passed the statute that criminalized the distributing a bomb making information in support of a federal crime of violence. this statute allows us to prosecute those who engage in terrorist acts themselves but also those who share deadly skills with others so they can engage in such attacks. , a2005, one individual one-time member of the ku klux klan, pleaded guilty to six it for constructing seven pipe bombs and instructing a confidential informant on how to use the bombs to cause the most destruction.
sure it's believed the bombs would be used to attack mexican and haitian immigrants in florida and he was ultimately .entenced to prison although law enforcement is a powerful tool, it's not the only tool. we must as a community work to reach individuals early on that path toward radicalization. the ideal solution is one that my shop for a law enforcement response. gw will beke particularly important on this front, to counter violent extremism. we must begin by doing more to empower those that have the best place to affect change. to that end, the attorney general, when she was attending the united nations general ownmbly events, hosted her
first-ever network of city leaders around the world involved in building community resilience. the network was created in recognition of the role of local communities in battling extremism and the need for more than a top-down approach. an approach that builds up from the communities instead. it takes a page from our integrated strategy and combating other types of violent extremism. we are most successful when we partner with and are out in the local communities working together to uphold the law. community members are often best positioned to relate to individuals were begun on a path of violent extremism because they see things we do not see in law-enforcement. in the united states according to one study, 80% of the international terrorism inspired cases inside the united states,
there was a connection -- a third-party bystander who was in a position to see the radicalization taking place but in over half those cases that person who saw it taking place did nothing to intervene. if we could increase the number of those witnesses who take pathn to all bus stop that -- to help us stop that path radicalization a good reduce the number of lives lost. there are similar evidence in other studies, cases of violent extremism. not only have a best edition to be influential in stopping people along this path, they may be the first is the potential signs of radicalization. recognizing the informs of early programs in boston, the greater los angeles area.
to work with youth programs and take other efforts. these outreach programs should lead to better trust and cooperation on anything ranging from civil rights to violence. we are exploring options to intervene with would be violent extremism before violence occurs and to think about trying to encourage those in the nonprofit community to develop best for thoseon offramps would be radicalized toward violence. this program will require continued community engagement and discussion. as we are learning in the ,nternational terrorism context it requires countering the message of hate online. figuring out where the people are. that means where they are not just in physical space but where they are in cyberspace so we know were to reach them and figuring out what messages are most effective to keep them from
following the spew of lies and bigotry that encourages people toward violence. often in that effort, some of the most valuable people can be former extremists who can explain why they went down that path in the first instance and why they realized it was the wrong path to take. they are often the most credible voices when it comes to being a positive voice back to those who are otherwise inclined to go down this path. center hasverty law a history of tracking hate in their efforts will continue to be critical. social media itself can be an avenue for those who want to counter bad guys. it could be a good place to get those stories out for those who have overcome difficult circumstances and avoided hate filled alienation. to conclude, we honor in all of our work and strive to those
affected by acts of terrorism. those who were killed and injured as well as those who survived and have proven resilient. the first responders and families touched by those acts. we welcome opportunities like this to discuss our work, share ideas and learn new ways of countering this type of violent extremism. we know the seriousness of the challenge we face and the stakes could not be higher. we know that we have to come up with new and innovative ways to prevent these attacks from taking place while doing so in a way that's consistent with fundamental values, civil rights, and civil liberties. we are grateful to have this forum. newre grateful for gw's project on extremism as it looks to develop data that can guide us in ways to confront this threat. i look forward to your questions and discussion.
[applause] >> thank you very much. a comprehensive overview of forms of extremism. interesting to see the similarities, differences and the approach the department is taking. a 360 degree overview of the hard and soft parts of both the threats and response that comes with it. very grateful that you decided to use this menu to make an important announcement. you discussed some of the issues that are controversial. some of the issues to counter extremism in general ranging from tactics used. to have some interesting -- i give theimit floor to heidi. >> i want to thank you for what
was a comprehensive speech and interesting for me. thank you to gw for putting this on. what struck me is that your description of domestic terrorist threats from the area we study, sovereign citizens, antigovernment folks, pretty much the way i would see it as well. we at the southern poverty law center for a while now have felt like the federal government was not responding to the fact that domestic terrorism was an increasing problem, especially lone actor terrorism. i don't think that could be set today at all. of theitalization committee started by holder last june, that having met several times, the new post you announced today is important. i think in general, the department of justice has been shifting resources and research into studying domestic terrorism
as well as international terrorism and nothing i say here should be taken to imply that islamic expired extremism is not .mportant i was glad to hear all of that. as the southern poverty law center looks at terrorism, one of the biggest issues that we see is basically we are seeing lone actor attacks take place about every 34 days in the united states. that includes our number for that since 2009 includes some extremist islamic attacks as well. the bulk of them have been white supremacists or antigovernment extremists. what we are seeing is a collapse in organized hate groups. the number of hate groups is
than falling rapidly. inspired by these ideas don't feel like they should be card-carrying members of these groups. it brings with it leadership battles. all kinds of trouble for these activists. what we are seeing is people picking up guns and doing violence against groups they are threatened by. a second part of this is they seem to be being radicalized almost entirely online. dylan roof was one of the best examples of this. he said in his manifesto, my entire world changed the day i came upon that hate site for the council of concerned citizens. a website that makes the presentation that there is out of the -- there's out-of-control black on white crime throughout the country. he apparently went down the road of becoming extremely radicalized and eventually charleston.ople in
i thought i would ask more about this radicalization online. what kinds of challenges doesn't pose in terms of civil liberties? in a way that is different from the 1980's or mcveigh and a ell.l c is a troubling trend. -- ie it in particular will start on the international arena. what we see now is the islamic levantn the decided to use social media to him barred thousands of messages a day through widespread propaganda. the number of people who bite on that is small proportionally but
it does not take a large number two cause great acts of harm. this is a tactic they are using throughout the world. it is hitting a smaller percentage inside the united states. the result is clear in the types of cases we see. that's why we believe it is so geographically dispersed because it is not coming usually from the local community. that's why you see it in 25 different u.s. attorneys offices. we are also seeing a troubling statistic in that it also affects the youth of the people getting drawn into this type of act. whereas with core al qaeda it might be aimed older demographic. here we are seeing in over 50% of cases we have brought, the defendants are 25 or younger. a third of them are 25 or younger.
the criminal justice system is not a great tool for dealing with juveniles. we prefer not to bring federal juvenile cases. we need a way when it comes to those who are getting radicalized online, what happens is they get the broad message and then we are seeing designated terrorists overseas having direct conversations with people and it could be in the bedroom of your house and the -- theyare not used to know who their kids friends are in the school or the real world but they don't know who they are hanging out with online. they end up actually talking to a terrorist overseas or starts walking them down the path of radicalization and that conversation sometimes is taking place on a commercially provided encrypted service. even if we are able to obtain the predicate to get a court order, when you go to serve it you cannot see the content of the conversation.
that is a challenge for the law enforcement and intelligence community. part, relying on research like yours as you look at it. we are definitely seeing an echo chamber where there are these places where people share violent thoughts and extremist ideologies online. we are also starting to see that type of connectivity or conversation take place when it comes to those who are motivated by the sovereign citizen ideology or white extremism. i think it is one where those who provide the communities where these conversations take place and know the services best and how to reach individuals need to and have begun to put resources into thinking, how can we prevent people from taking advantage of the services we provide to do what we don't want them to do which is try to get
children to commit acts of terrorism. they are going to need to be part of the solution because it is not taking place -- it is not one we can do on the street or in schools. we have to talk to those providing online forums. dr. beirich: which makes me think about another thing. , the social media capability of isil is similar to white supremacy in the united states. using the same tools for recruitment pushing whatever version of nasty propaganda might be. essentially functioning in the same way. between alerlap qaeda cost magazine being attractive to white supremacists. bomb making techniques and someone. -- and so on. what is there to do to counter this?
there are individuals and institutions, especially when it comes to islamic extremism, that are trying to counter twitter postings were recruitment is happening. i wonder if you think there is any analogy to the united states situation. we have the first amendment, certain protections that should exist. it doesn't make it more complicated for you all? mr. carlin: i will talk more broadly. placeructure that takes or the statute we use for international terrorism is often the material support to terrorism statute. that is a statute that is predicated on a formal designation process of a group as an international terror cell. once it is designated, support to that group, be it financial come in the form of your own
person, providing other types of material or weapons to that group. one that we is not have for domestic terrorism groups and i think it reflects our values. to do that for a group here would mean based on who the group is and what they are doing that the entire group is designated as the terrorist group. it exist in international werorism arena the same way have different tools available when it is a foreign nationstate behind an attack or conduct. .hat is one change another change is the foreign intelligence surveillance act. that relies on a tie to a foreign power. both statutory and constitutional reasons why you would not have the same tools available if it's a domestic actor. that allows us to get certain
courtprocesses to obtain orders that would otherwise not be available. law-enforcement, federal and local, working together. also local community groups here. if you plan on countering the message without talking about any particular company, i would hope it is one where it might be easier for us because it is coming so much out of our own culture to find credible voices here who can reach these groups and talk about how they had once gone down that path and now are opposing it. it's an area where we found what's most important is that it does not come from the federal government. as a prosecutor of these cases, i'm not going to be the best voice to reach those whom it be going down the path so it will be working with nonprofits or
independent groups who on their own can figure out who those voices are. using our power of persuasion with those in the private sector who might provide avenues for getting those voices out consistent with their own terms of service. then you don't have any first amendment issue. it's a private driven community-based response. i think our role in government in part is to make sure we're doing what we're doing here and talking to people about what the threat is that we are seeing. hopefully used as discussions to call people to action. one of the things the southern poverty law center is concerned about is demographic change in the united states when it comes to extremist groups we track. the country is going to become more multicultural, more ethnically diverse. we know the white population
50% in the 2000 40's according to the census -- 2040's according to the census. certainly with us for a while because it is part of american history, these wets a premise that he is which we have now spent several decades rejecting and changing. the civil rights movement being key to that. 2040's according to the census. i would if there is talk of the department about the challenge going forward. mr. carlin: i think we are definitely concerned about the challenge going forward. that's partly why the international terrorism threat right now rightly picks up a great deal of attention. .t is an issue of and, not or
we need to make sure we have the mechanisms in place so that we may continue to remain just as focused on the domestic terrorism threat while addressing the international terrorism threat. that is one reason taking a look at our structure, a single person who will focus on nothing issuee domestic terrorism to serve as a coordinator across different departments in agencies. depending on the group, it might manifest itself in white-collar type crime. might be violent extremism or those who need expertise on prosecuting the use of explosives. it might be a hate crime or civil rights statute. it might be motivated by environmental extremism. individuals who commit violent
acts and then it is in our environmental division. it's important for us structurally to come up with things like the domestic terrorism executive council to make sure we are looking across of threatrum appropriately for when you hit that juncture between where idea crosses over to crime. dr. beirich: thank you. dr. vidino: before opening to the public, i have a question about interventions which you mentioned in your conversation. you said how difficult it is to prosecute certain cases for first amendment issues particularly when it comes to juveniles, the challenges your department faces. there have been discussions and some attempts to create programs the way we have seen some european programs and in the united states developing a
strategy to move forward. i was wondering if you can address the challenges in developing an alternative to prosecution. , andlegal, cultural political challenges there are in doing so. mr. carlin: i am self-confessed not an expert nor in the right position to be a lead on it. reaching individuals before they hit -- before the come on the radar of the criminal justice system or intelligence system. that early stage when someone first get indoctrinated or encounters one of these ideas were people try to walk them down a path toward violence, at that point having someone in the andunity talk to them redirect them off that path. it is one that should be easy for us in a way because we are
up against pure evil. the individuals, if they really knew about what the islamic levant isthe doing from the beginning, would never go down that path. with some of the that path, they never would have gone down that path. individuals in the united states, if they fully encountered someone they trusted in the community, they never would have gone down that path. that is the type of work that needs to take place at the community level, with the support of community groups, nonprofits, and the pilot groups are designed to spur that type of act to the and educate. -- that type of activity and educate. sexualmple, in violence assault cases, you cannot look at the sexual predators without
educating people about the threats are kids face online. it is new. even gang recruitment is taking place online. we need to educate what we are seeing. when it comes to terrorism, we need to do the same thing across the spectrum of threats. and you hit the criminal justice system, it is much harder. there will be instances, no matter what, in both cases where after someone is convicted and served their sentence they will be released into the community. when it comes to gangs or do mystic offenders, there are existing groups with track records working with these individuals to react made them -- to react the mate -- two reacclimate them into the community so they do not reoffend.
we have nonprofit groups within expertise in the area. i look forward to groups like yours, and folks here today on coming up with that kind of solution in the future. if someone gets out unsupervised aleve, the judge is looking for a program. there is research being done on whether or not they are effective. takeidino: i would like to three or four questions. first, identify yourself. short questions. yes, please. quick. turn it on. i think i can speak loudly. first, i want to thank all three of you, not only individually for the handling of this difficult topic, but the organizations you represent. they are all good. think you.
-- thank you. as i think this has been treated comprehensively, i see one glaring gap as a retired naval intelligence officer, i often see into the military realm as well, that is inadequate attention to diplomacy. it has to be not a primary means of attack, but it should not be ignored. we just came back from turkey, and nato ally. they have the same range of problems at the international and the mystic threats against their population as do other germany.es, like we have problems in taiwan, japan, south korea. what i am suggesting is that i do not know how anyone can go, perhaps researchers at my home a
modern, jw owens, good try to get like-minded groups across dealing with the same issues, to look at the types of solutions they are coming up with. what are the differences in the problems they face versus ones we do not, so we do not waste time? generally, try to recruit into our ongoing efforts the best and brightest minds in the globe, not only in the u.s. dr. vidino: appreciate it. >> my name is ron taylor. thank you. i'm a senior fellow at george washington university. the greatfor presentations, questions, and putting this discussion on.
i will avoid the commentary in my question, though i am tempted. to think about what can complement the program that the programs, and initiatives, that you have described. there are a couple of things, and there is a question. certainly, one is that we always want to take that extreme person to discover that rising threat as soon as we can. that is the goal of a certain type of activity. you wanted to avoid labeling groups, tracking groups, you do not want to find groups, you want to find the people that will do bad things before they do it. in the professional security profession, and in the professional safety profession, there has been recent work on dealing with insider threats. toook at insider threats
infrastructures. it can include school systems, as you know, we all know, there action within the school systems. we saw it in oregon, connecticut, colorado, over and over. here's the question. would there be utility and complementing the approaches that the fbi, others, we all have, in trying to treat -- trying to detect and discover these rising threats from the perspective of looking at insider threat approaches, as you might address infrastructures? that is of a good, but there is work behind it. i will leave it there. question, butague there's work behind it. i will leave it there. >> i'm with the american bar
association standing committee. are references to social media networks starting to put resources toward preventing their networks from being misused. i wanted to ask the specific question, if there are currently, or plans in the future, for developing public/private partnerships with social media networks, information sharing, to address mutual interest? a.g. carlin: i will answer all three questions. in terms of learning from each combat thehow to terrorism threat, the international terrorism, lessons learned on how to confront the problem of violent extremism -- that is a very important series of efforts. theuple of weeks ago, with
president and other national security officials at a series of united nations of events, it was a year ago when for the first time you had a unanimous security council binding requiring countries around the world to have statutes on their books allowing them to take criminal action to prevent individuals from joining foreign terrorist groups, as we work together to confront this terrorist fight. secretary kerry was chairing it with a group called encountering global terrorist form. countries designed to share best practices on these terrorism threats, that is where we shared things like have an undercover operation that is consistent with civil liberties and rights, how to use classified information in a legal proceeding well protecting the sensitive source, method, and the right of the accused.
we talked about best practices in terms of countering violent extremism. has beenform incredibly valuable. for those doing research in the area, i encourage you to look at some of its products like the robot number random. robotside -- the memorandum. the insider threat, terrorism is a threat to international security, and the threat posed spies, economic espionage, and we put great effort into retooling the national security cyber threats that we are facing. in conjunction, about how we were created as a division, we were breaking down a wall between law enforcement and intelligence. insider-typeto threats, we realize in this area we need to get better about sharing across the federal-private line.
a effectivet do cyber protection without talking to companies, alerting them to the threats, and so much of their critical infrastructure is private. when it came to the espionage threat, we started, and last week and announced having someone focus full-time on domestic terrorism, someone who is an outreach coordinator in the national security space. my day job is a biometric hand office,o get into my devices in the wall to prevent is dropping, and we were not normally doing discussions like this, public forums, or meeting with the private sector. we recognize that the way the threat has changed, that has to be part of the job not only of the person in my role, but built into the division and pushed out to the u.s. attorney offices across the country. day today, they interact with
laboratories,, universities, local schools -- and they need to share threat notrmation that was traditionally part of the job of a national security professional . we are doing outreach programming, and it involves talking with providers to make sure they are aware of what we are seeing in terms of the threat, and working through how to confront it together. dr. vidino: please. use the microphone. >> thanks, very much. you heard the president in the wake of the shooting in oregon. asked the media to compare the number of deaths in gun violence to terrorism, which, of course, greatly outnumbers those. thatessage seems to be
there is an over emphasis on terrorism. that you can have one problem that is bigger, which does not mean the second problem, that is smaller, is not a problem. your work in the stories that we cover shows the mystic terrorism is an issue, but i wonder -- that is a point that i've heard in the president's message, and people in intel talk about it over emphasis on counterterrorism. they will say look at the threat from russia, china, and cyber assessment is greater. perspective, do you think in resources, messaging, perhaps in the way we cover it in the news, that we exaggerate the threat to some degree? not to say that it is not a threat, but it is exaggerated? youhe other hand, did
bristle a little bit? do you think there is an overestimate, and an hour coverage we get that balance right? from aurces, law-enforcement perspective, a national security perspective? like the president he is very much focused on preventing terrorist attacks in the united states and against citizens overseas. dedicated, and the president before him, day in and day out to be focused on the threat and use all the resources provided to us to make sure citizens are not killed here by those who are filled with hate. it comes to preventing that threat, i think that one reason
why we have seen, and hope to see, the numbers of people killed or maimed by these actors to stay low is because of the of individualsts -- not only at the department of justice, the fbi, but across the intelligence community and members of the military overseas, and diplomats. it is all tools, whether a diplomat or military tool to keep those who want to commit devastating catastrophic attacks on the scale of 9/11 or larger from succeeding, we need to remain dedicated. they still want to do those attacks. if we were not deterring, i think, unfortunately, they would. to use that phrase again, there is an and issue.
the domestic terrorism front. what i need with the families ort have lost loved ones, dealing with rehabilitation from a terrible injury, they do not care what the motive was. maybe i say that too broadly, me toey deeply ask prevent other families from having to go through those circumstances again. i always worry when it comes to terrorism, and it is a balance the 9/11 job, commission, when they put out the 10-year report they talked about the responsibility of government officials to talk about the threats candidly before the attacks occur. that is part of our job, and i take it seriously. the goal of a terrorist group is to affect civilian government.
ideally we would do our job, do it right, and no one would talk about it. that is winning against terrorism. have to balance that. -- if educating people the threat is occurring on social media, getting the message out that people need to be alert to what their children are doing on social media, or ake the necessary balance, is hard balance. i worry sometimes that the coverage hypes it in such a way thenduces the fear that terrorist is attempting to accomplish. we need to be careful in the way that we talk about it not to -- thatt phenomen phenomenon. from the university of
ottawa, thank you for putting this together. a simple question. you talk about community engagement. i wonder if that could be expanded to the idea of norm creation. what have you found in terms of engaging the community through the public school system, for example, where we talk about the dangers of drugs, sexual predators -- if we teach our young people, would it be -- to what extent would it be effective to talk about extremism and develop an and i extremism norm ethic early in the life of a young individual? -- and develop a non-extremism norm ethic early in the life of a young individual? >> are there programs that reach out to talk to students about the value and richness of
diversity? perhaps it could be done in conjunction with the model u.n. programs. thank you. >> i have been with the department of the interior for 30 years. i want is to say that last may at an emergency management conference, i the director of intelligence what they are doing to look at the growing threat of white supremacists and antigovernment groups, and noted shows thesec groups track with the election of president obama. he indicated that based on his information from the fbi, the splc numbers were not reliable, and the splc numbers were used to market and raise
contributions to the group. asked, is that your opinion or fact? he said that is based on my judgment and from what i've heard from the fbi. can you address the value of the splc's work in helping you deal with domestic terrorism, ?xtremism can you get the department of interior involved in your domestic terrorism executive council? they talk about earth first? they do not talk about domestic terrorism, antigovernment work that threatens the u.s. jim long nbc news. we are in a presidential campaign leading up to the presidential election. are you seeing increased threats on that front in terms of chatter or suspicious activity?
what are you doing in particular that is special and different from other efforts in terms to counter that if there are more threats? i would rather not address the full range of questions. i will start with the last first. as we gear up toward the the fbi, i know that talked with homeland security other groups, and will track carefully if there are threats linked to the election. as they have, leading up to prior elections, and if there are specific threats we will work to get that information both to those affected by the threats and broader warnings to the general, local law enforcement community. starting toeady
gear up in that regard, as they have before. with the questions about schools, the role of schools -- i think it is a valuable area to look at. there are folks from the department of justice that are focused on that part of the countering violent extremism spectrum before they reach the criminal justice system, that it is already, i know the case having addressed the conference mayors, they're working together to see how they can get this message into the school system, as they have in other arenas. in terms of the department of interior, they are a member, and rightly so, of the domestic terrorism executive council. they are definitely at the meetings.
and they need to be, because of where the threats, as you will sometimes emerge. sometimes defer to the fbi on their latest analysis, but our briefing said, as i said in my opening remarks, we think the domestic terrorism threat is real and present, and demands to be addressed in new, creative ways. having groups that dedicate what thes to examining threat is, observing it, and they are often at personal risk. these are groups that will identify some of the individuals looking at them, threaten them frivolouslye, or legal motions.
southern poverty law center and other groups are important. i look forward to entering this space and doing empirical research. as jim was saying, from cnn, there is research on international terrorism that helps us in trying to confront that threat, but there is not as some of theh on violent white supremacists were sovereign citizen groups, and that will be equally as helpful in confronting the threats. we have a gw on isis in america coming up on september 1. we look at all of the cases so far. we look at the social media feeds. a lot of things that are up to date will be in this report. >> eric tucker with the
associated press. some cases have fallen in the confines of the civil rights division. the department of justice, civil rights investigators, the fbi talked about the charleston shooting. under this new model, would the nsb ask for equity stake in some of the cases as a civil rights matter or civil rights hate crime? we effectively work them together now. the idea that this will help -- to give an example of the martin luther king junior attempted webing of that parade -- .ooks across authorities you don't know what the motive is in the beginning. in the early days of the boston
-- were, a law were g giving the date and time, but it could have been citizen motivated or white super messed. you work across giving your different expertise and different statutes that you can authorized to make sure you are leaving no investigative stone unturned. then, you look to see, given the conduct and evidence we have developed, which legal tool is best to use to hold this person to account? weree mlk bombing, there charges brought about linked to it being a hate crime. there were charges linked to the explosive device, and the attempt to murder. there was a domestic terrorism related sentencing enhancement. is, fromot important my perspective, who leads.
just making sure we are able to use the expertise and statutory tools across the department. continuingre i hope our focus and having someone dedicated to looking at that, what are we saying on the trends? what are the gaps? do we need legislation? do we need new policy, full will be very important. >> cnn. are you seeing encryption efforts by hate groups and antigovernment groups that are sophisticated as terror groups internationally? >> one question i had was about tor terrorism. there has been a trend for copycat attempts. it goes from bombers to gun users.
what can be done, specifically, to reduce the copycat aspect? we will start with that. that is a hard question. it bears a little on the question earlier where you have to cover some of these events, and publicly charge of them, but, unfortunately, that means that some of the messages get out into the community. it is a good area of research why, for most people, when you learn about these events, their reaction is that it is horrifying and you cannot imagine why someone would do that and it does not lead you to use similar tactics or techniques. there is a small audience for which it does. getting in early to those individuals and keeping them from committing violent acts
will be very important. you bled over in unusual ways to cases in new york, where it was individuals who were motivated by islamic extremist groups that made terrorist groups. as they did internet research on tax takes, they looked up -- research on tactics, they looked up rounding methods used in the oklahoma city bombings. you do see overlap. this is onen -- thing where it is important to have a discussion. it, through about thousands of years of military history, the ability to forunicate instantaneously control purposes, along with recruitment, and to do so in a way that is not penetrable by the adversary is something that leaders have long sought.
we are at an interesting age where american ingenuity, research, and development has produced those products and distributed them for free. there are many positive benefits, but it also means that whether it is an international terrorist group overseas, or violence espousing groups here, can, for free, have this incredibly powerful technology that is great for operational planning and recruitment of terrorist acts. from theou heard director and the fbi, and others, that this is a real challenge for intelligence and law enforcement. it is linked to a new technology. designs and came up with the technology. together, working with the best and brightest in the private
general for national security john carlin, making remarks that the justice department is creating a new position to coordinate investigations into violent, homegrown extremism. "he has comments at c-span.org. the website writing about homeland security's efforts on domestic terrorism in chattanooga's weight, phs 1 -- dhs wants to revive the national terror alert system, it was used to spread the word of potential attacks. you will find service members in chattanooga, tennessee and amid more terrorist inspired attacks, the dhs wants to revise and jumpstart the system. jeh johnson said before the organization that they review and is underway. because he has comments at c-span.org and more at the website defense one.com.
coveragehe white house will begin at 12:30 eastern today with republican presidential candidate florida senator marco rubio. a town hall meeting in new hampshire at 12:30. at 7:00 p.m., jeb bush will hold a campaign event in concorde, new hampshire. and at a: 30 eastern, hillary clinton will attend a rally in las vegas, nevada also on c-span. on c-span2, donald trump is in richmond, virginia at a rally at 6:30 eastern. >> this monday on c-span's new series, landmark cases, the mississippi river around new orleans had become a reading and tel avivolera are due to slaughter houses dumping byproducts in the area. ed only onellow
slaughterhouse to operate within the city district and the other houses took them to court. clement,,ned by paul constitutional law attorney and michael ross, author of the book shattered ream dreams. to tell the personal story of the butchers and the state of things in new orleans. join the conversation as we take your calls, tweets, and his book, best facebook comments monday on c-span, c-span3, and c-span radio. order your copy of the landmark cases companion book available for $8.95 at c-span.org/land markcases >> next, part of a conference on
balancing individual freedoms with national security. thea donohue focuses on fourth amendment, national security, and personal privacy. >> i had the pleasure of serving on the 2015 hancock symposium this past year. i am honored to introduce professor laura donohue. donohue is ara professor of law at georgetown law, director of georgetown center of national security and director of the center of privacy and technology. she writes on u.s. constitutional law and national security in the united states and the united kingdom. she is the author of the cost of covered terrorism,
counterterrorist law and the united kingdom, 1922-2000 and the forthcoming, the future of foreign intelligence. professor donahue obtained a bachelor of arts and philosophy jdm dartmouth college, a from stanford law school, and a phd in history from the university of cambridge, england. please welcome professor laura donahue. [applause] prof. donahue: thank you very much. president, dean, associate dean, dr. gibson, ms. gibby, and
members of the committee, for inviting me to join you for the hancock symposium. as you commemorate the 70th anniversary of sir winston churchill's address to westminster college, it is an honor and a privilege to be here. as a graduate of churchill college, cambridge, i have loyalty and tremendous respect for sir winston. i returned to the college every summer to avail myself of his great legacy and to center my thoughts and an increasingly complex and swift world. for many years, we had one of his grade school report cards on display. as graduate students, it gave us great hope. when he was 10 years old, the headmaster wrote of his young charge, conduct has been exceedingly bad. he is not to be trusted to do a single thing.
and gross misjudgment of character, he added he has no ambition. it turned out he had great ambition. great personal ambition which was a facet of his character that he referenced when he came here in 1946. he took the opportunity to speak freely because any private ambitions he says he may have cherished have been satisfied beyond as well the streams. he acknowledged a special relationship and urged the two countries to set a common course. the safety and welfare of and the freedom and progress of all men and women. to give security, he argued every home must be shielded from tyranny. for churchill, it was not a question of security versus freedom as this symposium contemplates, but security
through liberty. he spoke of liberties and joys by individual citizens throughout the british empire. we must never, he stated, fear to proclaim the principles of freedom and rights of men which of the joint inheritance of the english-speaking world and which through magna carta, the bill of rights, habeas corpus, and the english common law find their famous expression in the declaration of independence. nearly seven decades after churchill under these words, the united states and united kingdom find themselves at the dawn of a new era. we face exit essential threat. science and technology have radically altered our world. while the cold war was defined by nuclear weapons, our world is defined by technology. new and emerging technologies offer great promise.
nevertheless, the digital age, like the atomic age, offers great peril. at-risk of the fundamental principles of liberty that churchill underscored, freedoms that extend to magna carta. principles that the founding seriously asok so to incorporate into the virginia declaration of rights, our nations state constitution, and into the fourth amendment. recalling the fourth amendment, i will draw from three areas. english legal treatises and case law, the american experience, and the current state of affairs. advances in technology and efforts by the government to harness these technologies to protect us from foes now threaten to undermine the most important protections on government power which is the prohibition on general weren't -- warrants.
search and seizure it lies at the heart. it was to prevent the use of general warrants or more specific warrants that we adopted the fourth. if we do not act quickly, this liberty which sir winston recalled, will be lost. a general weren't is a document issued by a court or the executive branch on its own merits, giving officials the authority to search for and to seize private documents without any prior specific evidence of wrongdoing. it does not specify with to give verity the persons or places to be searched whether papers or records to be seized. it is not supported by an of the or affirmation of any wrongdoing, it amounts to a fishing expedition to find evidence. for centuries prior to the american founding, english
scholars projected general warrants as the worst exercise of tyrannical power. during the reign of charles the kerst, sir edward cokok argued against these things. he said we are gone and in a worst-case than ever if we agree for matters of state, we shall leave magna carta and other statutes and make them for this -- fruitless. the 1628 petition of rights incorporated a ban on general warrants. coke betrayed his arguments. to issue general warrants, is against magna carta, presenting their use lay at the heart of such law.
neither will he pass upon him, or condemn him, but by the lawful judgment of his tears -- peers or by the law of the land. his rejection of the law reflected growing frustration of expanding use of power by the crown. vfl subject to a general war on his deathbed. ordered thatirst his home be searched and all such papers and manuscripts that might be relevant be seized. the king himself broke open the trunks. but the acts were too late to stem the tide, as charles the first's execution and in the divine right of kings, coke's ideas became cemented into legal thought. an matthew hale, intellectual giant famous for his history of the laws of england he noted in his first volume that a general weren't to
search for a felon's or stolen goods, not good. two years later parliament directed publication of the manuscript. crown finally the appeared and became influential. hale stated a general warrant in all suspected places is not good, but only to search in a particular place where the party is assigned before the justice is suspicious and probable cause whereas for these warrants were judicial act and must be granted upon a examination. he continued therefore i take those warrants to be dormant until any felony has been permitted, they are not justifiable. it makes the party the judge. for centuries, english courts look to these and other treatises and rejected the concept of a general weren't -- warrant.
it was for this that was appealed by the crown's efforts to prevent publication of a irreverent political weekly, north britain number 45. john wilkes had founded north britain in opposition to the pro-government neighbor called the britain. when the english entered into negotiations with the french bringing seven years war to conclusion, north britain attacked the terms of peace. wilkes shown here in less than a flattering light, he lamented the french king by a stroke of his pen, has regained all the power of her nation and her allies could never have done. remarkably, the treaty of paris ruinaved england from the of success, the crown had been sunk even to prostitution. this time he had gone too far. three days after the publication, the crown issued a general warrant.
making strict and diligent search for the authors, ainters, and publishers in thing that is followed dozens of s'lawyer said more was at stake than the execution of one warrant against one person. in vain has our house been declared the law, our asylum and defense, if it is capable of being entered, upon any frivolous or no pretense at all, by a secretary of state. the seizing of the papers was the worst offense possible against the crowns subjects. english law, counsel argued, never uses a general warrant because a general knowledge and might make offense and for the promulgation of our more private concerns. the most secret and personal nature.
preparation -- reparations could not be made. be on the privacy invasion, papers,ant risk, some quite innocent in and of themselves might buy the slightest alteration be converted to criminal action. only an hour of deliberation, the jury returned a verdict. they awarded an astonishing 1000 pounds to wilkes. two days later, the st. james chronicle reflected by this important decision, every englishman has the satisfaction of seeing that his home is his castle. 1604, sird it in edward coke had declared that every house of everyone is to him his castle and fortress against injury and violence. he incorporated this into his institute and wrote a man's
house is his castle. each man's home is his safest refuge. two years after chief justices set, lord chief justice mansfield found himself confronted i a general warrant/ the same one executed in relation to north britain number 45. it was executed against the printer. the councilnn, argued that the generality of warrants was precisely what made it invalid. there was no probable cause. if such a warrant to be issued, the power with the mischievous and might be reductive of great depression. causing ransacking of private studies. >even without a previous charge on of his contrary to national -- natural justice, as well as
to the liberty of the subject. it is an infringement of the national right of mankind. lord mansfield, presiding over the case, agreed and noted hail and others prove that such a void and there is no case or book to the contrary. chief justice charles platt contemplated another case. that considering the great end to enter into the greater society is minute is ao trespass. he didn't mean merely the physical intrusion of the home. papers, he said, are the owners goods. they are his dearest property.
from enduring seizure that they will hadley barrett inspection -- hardly bear inspection. it deserves not to be spoken of being not a warrant at all. commentaries on the law of england underscores the distinction between specific and you warrants -- general warrants. it is the duty of magistrate that ought not to be left to the officer to judge the ground of suspicion. when the american colonists left england, they expected the rights of englishmen with travel overseas. in the new world, general warrants were prolific. is at of assistance
document provided to customs agents and able officers -- naval officers giving the authority to search homes and offices to look for goods that failed to comply with customs. anybody searched was required to assist the officer and anybody served had to assist. in the context of the french indian war, great britain began using this increasingly prevent the french from trading. massachusetts bay governor william surely relied upon his power to deliver a general warrant. -- williams with the southern secretary of state directed the then governor of massachusetts bay colony's to francis bernard to stop such as northern trade with french canada, but trade with the french indies. if you much latest, george the second died during the crown
just six months to review all the of assistance -- writs of assistance. the merchants chose one of the leading lawyers of the time. james otis junior. he resigned his position as deputy act to general -- advocate general to take the position. caseration in paxton's named after one of their customs agents who originally authorized and execute the writ of assistance remains one of the most famous and american history. president john adams who was president reported otis was a flame of fire. his argument breeds the breath of life. man to goed every away as i did ready to take arms against writs of assistance. james otis stood up to speak and something profound changed in
america. otis attacked the very concept of a general warrant and said he will to his dying day of those with all powers and faculties god has given him, all such instruments of slavery on the one hand as this writ of assistance is. the most destructive of english liberties, and the fundamental rentals -- principles of the constitution. hearkening to charles the first and james the first, he noted it was this despot of power that one king of england his throne and another his head. everyone carrying these has the potential to be a tyrant. one backed by the law, individuals could use it to take revenge against others. anyone could force others to his will.
the essential branches of english liberty, otis noted, is the freedom of health. a man's house is his castle and while he is quiet, he is as well guarded as a prince and his castle. , declaredassistance legal, would annihilate this privilege. john adams reflected then and there was the first scene of the first act of opposition to the arbitrary claims of great britain then and there. the child independence was born. to assurewere eager that the same states did not have the power to overwrite their rights. in may of 1776, the fifth virginia convention assembled. patrick henry, george washington, george mason, george likes, richard henry lee, thomas
jefferson, and others. in that document, mason laid out the natural rights of man. features some from locked and montesquieu. he declared that men have certain rights which limit the power of the government. among these is the right to be free of general warrant. the virginia declaration of rights states that general warrants by any officer or passenger may be commanded to search suspected places without evidence of a fact committed, or whose offense is not particularly described or supported by evidence are grievous and oppressive and ought not to be granted. the right against promiscuous search and seizure lay at the heart of the founding, along with the principle of consent and the right to jury trial, if
free to colonists from tyrannical world. alone. in julyt 1776, benjamin franklin and others drafted something for virginia. that the people shall be secure in their persons houses, papers, and possessions from unreasonable searches and seizures. by using the word unreasonable, pennsylvania meant something different. then what is commonly attributed to the word today. unreasonable in the 18th century meant against reason. you find this commonly and text of the time. which was against the reason of the common law, anything against common law was illegal. when using this term unreasonable search, they met general warrant.
because they violated common law. delaware, maryland, north carolina, other states followed suit. these early state constitutions transformed what had been a colonial grievance about the crown's violation of their rights due to them as english and into -- as englishmen. the the founders rewrote articles of confederation into the u.s. constitution, state after state demanded a new clause prohibiting general warrants. the most intense exchange perhaps unsurprisingly took place in virginia. patrick henry was charismatic and led the attack. he worried that the new constitution in peril americans rights as well as sovereignty. the demanded the bill of rights be added to ensure the protection of ancient liberties. general warrant's one of his
particular concerns. i feel myself distressed because of the necessity of securing personal right seems not to have pervaded the minds of men, for many other valuable things are committed -- omitted. without evidence of the commission seeing any evidence of the crime ought be visited. the crime was that property to be taken in the most arbitrary manner. without any evidence or reason. everything considered sacred could be in henry's room, be searched and ransacked by the strong hand of power. the virginia delegates went on to establish as part of the proposed ill of rights -- bill of rights the protection against the seizure by general warrants. it stated that every freeman has a right to be secure from all unreasonable searches and seizures