Here’s another problematic piece of legislation lawmakers are trying to pass when they think we aren’t looking. Democrats in the House and Senate are introducing a bill intended to crack down on private militias.
The lawmakers are using the J6 protests at the U.S. Capitol as the justification for this measure, which will almost certainly be used to target folks on the right.
The text of the bill says that it will be illegal to act as part of a “private paramilitary organization” in various ways.
It shall be unlawful to knowingly, in a circumstance described in subsection (b), while acting as part of or on behalf of a private paramilitary organization and armed with a firearm, explosive or incendiary device, or other dangerous weapon [...] publically patrol, drill, or engage in techniques capable of causing bodily injury or death.
The legislation will create “different tiers of criminal penalties based on whether violations result in injury or property damage,” according to a press release.
Specifically, the legislation would prohibit the following dangerous conduct:
publicly patrolling, drilling, or engaging in harmful or deadly paramilitary techniques
interfering with or interrupting government proceedings
interfering with the exercise of someone else’s constitutional rights
falsely assuming the functions of law enforcement and asserting authority over others
training to engage in such behavior
The bill lays out potential punishments for those who violate the law.
Any person who violates subsection (a) shall be fined under this title, imprisoned for not more than 1 year, or both, except that—[...] in the case of a violation that results in bodily injury, the person shall be fined under this title, imprisoned for not more than 5 years, or both; or in the case of a violation that results in death, the person shall be fined under this title and imprisoned for any term of years or for life.
Sen. Ed Markey (D-MA), who co-sponsored the bill, said that “white supremacists affiliated with paramilitary organizations stormed the U.S. Capitol, shattering windows, walls, and the families of five U.S. Capitol police officers” and claimed paramilitary groups such as the Proud Boys (which is NOT a paramilitary group) and the Oath Keepers “pose a serious threat to democracy and the rule of law.”
Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD), who is introducing the measure in the House, said these groups “are using political violence to intimidate our people and threaten democratic government and the rule of law.”
There are several problems with this bill. To start with, the proposal paints with a brush as broad as the Grand Canyon and conflates regular militias with extremist groups without accounting for the fact that not all of these groups are the same. Most militia members are law-abiding citizens who simply fear a day when our government becomes even more tyrannical. In other instances, they simply exist to serve their communities. They are not all extremist groups.
Of course, this is the entire point, isn’t it? By refusing to distinguish between peaceful groups and those who might want to commit violence against innocent people, the legislation would empower the government to target organizations based on politics instead of a desire to protect people.
Secondly, this bill could potentially run afoul of the First Amendment right to assembly. Militias, in their non-extremist forms, are essentially a manifestation of this right. They are groups of people banding together for a common interest. There is nothing illegal about engaging with their communities in this manner as long as they are not using violence.
The Second Amendment is also an issue here. The bill could be used to infringe on the right to keep and bear arms and the amendment’s provision for a “well-regulated militia.” Public patrolling, drilling, or other types of training with firearms should not be regulated by the government if participants are not initiating violence against other people or their property. The framers of the Constitution clearly made room for citizens to gather together and form militias for their protection.
Lastly, it is essential to note that this legislation has a clear political bias. Nobody should be under the illusion that the state, under this proposed law, would act against “paramilitary” or “militia” groups that espouse the acceptable type of politics. Note how neither Markey nor Raskin mentioned Antifa, which has repeatedly engaged in political violence against folks on the right exercising their right to free speech.
There is a reason for that.
Markey and Raskin want the government to specifically target right-leaning militias and anyone they can link to them. They want to paint anyone who values the Second Amendment as extremist.
With the current makeup of the House, it is unlikely this legislation will pass in its current state. But Democrats could be introducing it to pave the way for a future when their party controls both chambers of Congress. If this bill passes, the government will be empowered to make what they are doing to the J6ers seem charitable by comparison.
