The Issue of Countering Violent Extremism from the 110th Congress (January 2007 to January 2009)

in
Printer-friendly versionPrinter-friendly version
Date: 
April 7, 2010

 
Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Act (H.R. 1955)

On Oct. 23, 2007, the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Act (H.R. 1955) that would have created a commission and research center on "violent radicalization" and "extremist belief systems" that can lead to homegrown terrorism  passed the U.S. House of Representatives. It was not voted on in the Senate. The bill had been introduced in the House by Rep. Jane Harman (D-CA), Chair of the Homeland Security Committee's Subcommittee on Intelligence, Information Sharing, and Terrorism Risk Assessment. In 2009, however, Harman said she no longer endorsed the creation of such a commission and would not pursue a similar bill in the 111th Congress.
 
The bill would have:

  • Created a ten-member national commission charged with examining the "facts and causes of violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence in the United States" and reporting its findings and legislative recommendations to Congress within 18 months of its creation. The commission would have had the power to conduct hearings and receive evidence, but did not authorize it to subpoena persons or records.
  • Established a Center of Excellence for the Study of Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism in the United States, at a university designated by the Secretary of Homeland Security "following the merit-review processes" used for similar programs in the past.
  • Conducted a survey of approaches used by other nations to address the problem, to have been conducted jointly by the Department of Homeland Security, Department of State, the Attorney General and "other Federal Government entities, as appropriate." The results were to have been reported to Congress and used in developing a national policy on violent radicalization, "to the extent that methodologies are permissible under the Constitution."
     

Advocacy groups such as the ACLU and the Equal Justice Alliance (EJA) said the bill would have created a "thought police" and opposed it. EJA’s Executive Director Odette Williams said the commission "would give the appearance that whoever they are investigating is potentially a traitor or disloyal or a terrorist, even if all they were doing was advocating lawful views."
 
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and other groups are raised concerns that its vague definitions, broad mandate and minimal oversight would lead to ethnic profiling and censorship based on personal beliefs. In a press release the ACLU said, "Law enforcement should focus on action, not thought."
 
Senate Report: Violent Islamist Extremism, The Internet, and the Homegrown Terrorist Threat

On May 8, 2008 the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, chaired by Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) published a report on homegrown terrorism that has raised free speech and guilt-by-association concerns. The report, Violent Islamist Extremism, The Internet, and the Homegrown Terrorist Threat,   focused on "how violent Islamist terrorist groups like al-Qaeda are using the Internet to enlist followers into the global violent Islamist terrorist movement …" While the report frequently referred to "domestic radicalization" and "violent Islamist ideology," it never defines these terms. It cited attacks on public transit systems in London and Madrid and three examples of terrorist plot arrests in the United States as evidence of a "growing trend that has raised concerns within the U.S. intelligence and law enforcement communities."

The report's exclusive focus on the Internet and on American Muslims generated an immediate response from the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). Senior Legislative Counsel Timothy Sparapani said, "Focusing on people with specific religious beliefs or backgrounds will not protect against the Timothy McVeigh's of the world. This narrow focus could cost us dearly in the future." 


Prior to release of the report, a broad-based coalition of nonprofits had sent the committee recommendations that urged caution, saying, "It is critically important the articulation of the problem does not cause people merely exercising their First Amendment rights to fear being swept into the net of suspicion."