Last month, Democratic congressman Jamie Raskin from Maryland found himself in court seeking a protective order after dealing with a series of menacing calls, emails, and letters that he regularly receives and forwards to the Capitol Police. One incident involved a man showing up at his house, shouting about various topics including the Covid-19 vaccine, Donald Trump’s impeachment, and gender-related surgeries. This same man had previously confronted Raskin at a July 4 parade, using profanities. Raskin emphasized the need for the man to receive parenting lessons rather than jail time.
The threats and harassment faced by public officials in America have become alarmingly common in recent weeks. Bomb threats led to the closure of libraries and the suspension of courthouse operations in various locations across the country. In Bakersfield, California, an activist protesting the war in Gaza was arrested for making threatening statements to City Council members. Additionally, a Florida man was sentenced to prison for threatening to harm Chief Justice John Roberts.
Former President Donald Trump’s refusal to rule out violence in the event of losing the election, along with the increasing number of threats and harassment directed at public officials, has created a pervasive atmosphere of fear and danger in American public life. From judges to members of Congress, individuals in positions of authority are constantly facing threats and intimidation, significantly impacting their ability to carry out their duties.
A survey conducted by the National League of Cities revealed that over 80% of local officials have experienced threats or harassment. The trend of increased threats towards public officials has been documented by various agencies, including the United States Marshals Service and the U.S. Capitol Police. The rise in politicized violence and the normalization of threats have created a volatile environment, exacerbated by social media platforms that amplify outrage and misinformation.
Experts warn that the current climate of intimidation is fueled by political division, mistrust, and societal issues such as mental illness and prejudice. Women and people of color are disproportionately targeted, with little research available on the political affiliations of those behind the threats. The prevalence of threats and violence in American politics underscores the urgent need for measures to ensure the safety and security of public officials and address the root causes of this troubling trend. Recent research indicates that acts of political violence are more likely to be committed by individuals aligned with right-wing causes and beliefs. Public officials across various levels of government are responding to this trend by changing how they perform their duties. Many are feeling hesitant to seek re-election or pursue higher office, while others are avoiding controversial issues altogether. The turnover rate among election workers has increased since 2020, and even librarians report feeling vulnerable to the current climate of political violence. Clarence Anthony, the executive director of the National League of Cities, observed that those perpetrating these attacks are seeking confrontation rather than solutions.
Romney did not identify the legislators by name and declined an interview for this article.
Andrew Hitt, the former head of the Republican Party in Wisconsin, agreed to go along with the Trump campaign’s failed scheme to overturn the 2020 election because he was “scared to death,” he told “60 Minutes.”
“It was not a safe time,” he said.
‘Who Is the WORST?’
Four days after Mr. Trump was indicted in August in a federal election interference case, the presiding judge, Tanya S. Chutkan, received an alarming voice mail message at her chambers.
“If Trump doesn’t get elected in 2024, we are coming to kill you,” the caller said, according to court documents.
Investigators tracked the message to Abigail Jo Shry, a 43-year-old Texas woman who was already facing state charges related to similar threats against two Texas state senators, a Democrat and a Republican.
Ms. Shry has a history of drug and alcohol abuse and “gets all her information from the internet,” her father testified. “You can get anything you want to off the internet. And, you know, it will work you up.” (Ms. Shry’s lawyer declined to comment.)
Mr. Trump has been relentless in attacking the judges overseeing the criminal and civil cases that have confronted him of late. Last month, he asked, “Who is the WORST, most EVIL and most CORRUPT JUDGE?” in a social media post that named the judges.
They are being inundated. At least three of them, including Judge Chutkan, have been swatted. In February, a woman was sentenced to three years in prison for threatening Judge Aileen Cannon, who is overseeing the federal criminal case against Mr. Trump involving mishandling classified documents.
Last month, a resident of Lancaster, N.Y., pleaded guilty to making death threats against Judge Arthur F. Engoron, who presided over a civil fraud trial against Mr. Trump in Manhattan this year, as well as threats against Letitia James, the New York attorney general, who brought the case.
The judges have been clear that Mr. Trump’s posts make an impact. “When defendant has publicly attacked individuals, including on matters related to this case, those individuals are consequently threatened and harassed,” Judge Chutkan wrote in a gag order trying to limit Mr. Trump’s public remarks.
The prospect of being a target for abuse has already deterred some from participating in cases involving Mr. Trump. During a February court hearing in Atlanta, former Gov. Roy Barnes of Georgia, a Democrat, said that Fani T. Willis, the district attorney of Fulton County, had asked him to lead the prosecution of Mr. Trump for election interference in Georgia.
Mr. Barnes declined, explaining: “I wasn’t going to live with bodyguards for the rest of my life.”
Ms. Willis has left her home amid threats, and the county pays about $4,000 a month for her new housing. Her staff was outfitted with bulletproof vests. This month, a Californian was indicted after threatening in the comment section of a YouTube video to kill her “like a dog.”
Intimidation Close to Home
Local officials are feeling the pressure.
Election officials — from secretaries of state to poll workers — have faced hostility and abuse after Mr. Trump’s false claims of fraud in the 2020 election, leading to resignations and difficulty recruiting and retaining staff members and volunteers. Such threats “endanger our democracy itself,” Attorney General Merrick Garland said this week.
Local libraries have also become targets amid a heated campaign to ban books and cancel events aimed at members of the L.G.B.T.Q. community. Bomb threats were reported by 32 of the American Library Association’s member institutions last year, compared with two the year before and none in 2021.
Carolyn Foote, a retired librarian in Austin, Texas, who co-founded a group that supports librarians, said her members had become used to being called “pedophile, groomer, pornographer.”
Proving that ugly and hostile language has crossed the line from First Amendment-protected speech to credible threat can be difficult. Experts say prosecutions became even harder last year after the Supreme Court raised the bar for what qualifies as a credible threat, ruling that the person making the threat has to “have some subjective understanding of the threatening nature of his statements.”
In Bakersfield, Calif., a lawyer for Riddhi Patel, the activist who spoke of murdering City Council members after urging them to take up a Gaza cease-fire resolution, said her statement was not a crime. She has pleaded not guilty to 21 felony charges.
“It’s clear that this was not a true criminal threat, which under California law must be, among other things, credible, specific, immediate and unconditional,” said Peter Kang, the public defender of Kern County, which includes Bakersfield. “Instead, what we hear are Ms. Patel’s strong, passionate expressions, which fall within the bounds of constitutionally protected speech.”
Local officials say they have become accustomed to dealing with vitriol and anger that they can do little about. In Nevada County, Calif., Natalie Adona, the county clerk and recorder, said employees received a barrage of threats in 2020 from people who did not accept the election results, and again in 2022 over a mask mandate.
Ms. Adona said the county secured a restraining order against one of three people who forced their way into the building. But her staff has had to learn to endure and defuse confrontations.
“A lot of what we have experienced falls into this gray area,” Ms. Adona said. “It makes you look over your shoulder.”
Kitty Bennett contributed research
Please rephrase this sentence.
Source link
