A federal judge declined to dismiss a Justice Department indictment against the Southern Poverty Law Center, finding no evidence of vindictive prosecution. The April indictment alleges a conspiracy to launder money through SPLC's paid-informant program; Judge Emily Marks concluded SPLC failed to show prosecutorial animus and denied discovery into the government's motives. Public comments by officials — including acting Attorney General Todd Blanche — were not accepted as proof of malicious intent. The criminal trial is scheduled to begin in Alabama in October.
Federal Judge Denies SPLC’s Motion To Dismiss DOJ Indictment; Trial Set For October
A federal judge on Friday refused to dismiss an April indictment brought by the Justice Department against the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), finding no evidence of vindictive prosecution that would justify dismissal or expanded discovery into the government's motives.
The indictment, filed in April, centers on narrow allegations that the nonprofit — known for tracking extremist and hate groups since the 1970s — participated in a conspiracy to launder funds through its paid-informant program. SPLC asked the court in May to toss the charges, arguing the group was being singled out by the Trump administration in retaliation for its investigations and for public attention around the president's support from extremist groups such as Patriot Front and the Proud Boys. The filings also noted that FBI director Kash Patel ended the government’s long-standing relationship with SPLC last year.
U.S. District Judge Emily Marks rejected SPLC’s request, concluding the organization had "fail[ed] to establish some evidence tending to show prosecutorial animus" and that nothing presented so far "warrant[ed] discovery into the government's motives." The court found that public criticisms — including remarks from acting Attorney General Todd Blanche that SPLC "stoke[s] racial hatred" — could not be treated as proof of malicious intent because they were part of the government's stated claims.
"This case typifies modern American discourse. It is unsurprising that the parties' arguments primarily comprise what has become all too common: ad hominem attacks in the form of press releases, interviews and social media posts… but our Republic recognizes different venues to vindicate different things; federal courts are not the proper forum for airing political grievances," Judge Marks wrote.
The criminal case is scheduled for trial in Alabama in October. Both sides are expected to continue preparing pretrial motions and evidence disclosures in the coming months.
Background: The SPLC has for decades documented extremist organizations and hate groups. The Justice Department says the current charges are narrow and focused on alleged financial misconduct connected to a paid-informant program; SPLC denies wrongdoing and has framed the prosecution as politically motivated.
Help us improve.
