Lawsuit seeks to strip the SPLC of it's 501c3 status and asks millions in damages.

phill4paul

Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2007
Messages
46,967
Oh, this looks like a good battle to be won. Perhaps spurring a class action by those slandered in the MIAC report?

In December 2018, a Baltimore lawyer filed a devastating lawsuit against the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) and two of its employees. The SPLC targeted Glen Keith Allen over his former ties to the National Alliance (NA), a white nationalist group. In doing so, the liberal group allegedly violated laws and legal codes of conduct by receiving and then paying for stolen documents in violation of confidentiality agreements. The group went after Allen with the intent of getting him fired by the city of Baltimore and permanently destroying his future prospects.

Allen's suit claims that the SPLC should have its 501c3 tax-exempt status revoked, that it owes him restitution for racketeering, and that it should pay $6.5 million in damages. It also references Allen's pro bono work on behalf of African-Americans and his mentorship of an African-American teen, powerfully rebutting claims that he is a racist. Allen told PJ Media he now regrets his NA support, and an African-American friend of his laughed at the idea of this lawyer being branded a racist.

Perhaps most importantly, the suit attacks the liberal group for undermining America's tradition of free expression. In an August 2016 interview with The Washington Post cited in the lawsuit, SPLC Intelligence Project Director Heidi Beirich (a defendant in the case) claimed to have watched Allen "like a hawk" because he had "the worst ideas ever created."

"This East Europe Communist thought-crime surveillance mentality is antithetical to fundamental American cultural and Constitutional principles protecting freedom of expression and association," Allen wrote in the suit, which can be found on his website. His lawsuit uses concrete claims of lawbreaking and defamation to expose the SPLC's Orwellian strategy of branding its opponents "hate groups" and orchestrating campaigns against them.

In August 2016, the SPLC published an article branding Allen a "neo-Nazi lawyer" and insinuating that this lawyer's work for the city of Baltimore was racist. Beirich, the article's author, smeared a small political party as racist and then published allegedly stolen documents protected by confidentiality agreements connecting Allen to the National Alliance.
Allen, a longtime partner at the international law firm DLA Piper, had left the firm in February 2016 to work for the Baltimore city solicitor, taking a pay cut for the opportunity to become chief city solicitor in charge of appeals in about a year. As part of his job, he filed one specific motion to help the city in a lawsuit filed by a black man who was wrongly accused of murder. Beirich painted this work as malicious to African-Americans.

This article led Baltimore's law department to fire Allen immediately, costing him at least 10 years of employment at a salary of $90,000 or more. The article also destroyed his reputation, making it extremely difficult for him to obtain a job, create a good relationship with clients, or argue before judges and jurors who would immediately judge him a "neo-Nazi lawyer." Furthermore, a year after Allen's firing, Baltimore badly lost the case, losing $15 million in damages.

Beirich's article claimed that Allen was a "well-known neo-Nazi," but cited one obscure comment thread as the only public connection between the lawyer and the NA. Beirich also slammed the American Eagle Party as racist, which the lawsuit denounces as a "fraudulent characterization."

The SPLC could not keep its story straight. In Beirich's article, Allen is a "well-known neo-Nazi," but on the 2016 Hate Map, the SPLC and its Intelligence Project featured a photo of Allen with this caption: "When the City of Baltimore recently hired Glen Keith Allen, a neo-Nazi, nobody knew of his involvement with white supremacist groups, except for us. Because of our investigation and exposé, he was swiftly fired" (emphasis added).

In order to brand this lawyer a "neo-Nazi," Beirich publicized documents the SPLC allegedly obtained illegally.

According to the lawsuit, the SPLC's receipt of stolen documents and the payment for them violated not only the law but also the canons of legal ethics in Alabama, where both Beirich and the other defendant, Mark Potok, are registered as lawyers. The SPLC is a 501c3 public interest law firm, so its involvement in this activity disqualifies its tax-exempt status.

The SPLC should also lose its tax-exempt status for mail and wire fraud, false statements on its tax forms, and campaigns of destruction and defamation against its perceived enemies, the lawsuit claims.

The SPLC defines "hate group" expansively, listing mainstream conservative and Christian groups like Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) and the Family Research Council (FRC) along with the Ku Klux Klan. Yet it constantly emphasizes the link between "hate groups" and violence. On the top of its 2016 "hate map," it states, "Hate and antigovernment extremist groups continue to operate at alarming levels in the U.S. — fomenting racist violence, seeking to poison our democracy, and, in some instances, plotting domestic terrorist attacks."

"It is, accordingly, false — and outrageous — for the SPLC to smear as 'hate groups' conservative Christian groups that on no fair and objective interpretation could so properly be stigmatized," Allen writes in the lawsuit.

Allen also argues that the SPLC violated the IRS's requirement that 501c3 tax-exempt organizations refrain from participating in "any political campaign on behalf of or in opposition to any candidate for public office." Between October 2015 and November 2016, the smear group slammed Republican (and only Republican) candidates for president. Yet in its 2017 Form 990, the SPLC claimed under penalties of perjury that it did not engage in political campaign activities.

For these and other reasons, the SPLC should lose its tax-exempt status, the suit claims. Allen's suit also demands $1.5 million from the group under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act. The SPLC and its Intelligence Project allegedly collaborated to engage in illegal activity affecting interstate commerce and damaging Allen specifically.

Allen also claims that the SPLC, Beirich, and Potok caused intentional harm to his career and profited from his loss, defamed him, and aided and abetted Dilloway's breach of contract. In yet another count against the defendants, the lawsuit claims the SPLC negligently trained and supervised Beirich and Potok. In addition to the compensatory damages of $1.5 million, the suit demands punitive damages of $5 million.

The lawsuit includes no fewer than nine counts against the defendants, so even if one or more fail, it would be very difficult for the SPLC to convince the court to dismiss the case.

"My affiliation with the National Alliance was a mistake, one of the greatest of my life," Allen told PJ Media. "I would like to believe we live in a society where people can learn from their mistakes and move on."

"My present outlook, which I have held for many years, is a mixture of Ron Paul Libertarianism, First Amendment advocacy and civil debate, and a strong opposition to the violent behavior we've seen carried out on the left for several years," he added. "I also support a mutually respectful pride and dignity for people of all heritages, including white people."

This lawsuit is serious, and the SPLC cannot just brush it off as the ravings of some racist bigot with a grudge. Allen was a top arbitrator at one of the largest law firms in the world. His claims are strong and comprehensive.

The SPLC's "hate map" has inspired at least one terrorist attack, and the far-Left smear group has constituently pressured Big Tech companies to censor conservative speech in the name of banishing "hate" from the internet.



https://pjmedia.com/trending/lawsui...ead-lies-to-destroy-lawyer-for-thought-crime/
 
Last edited:
Perhaps better than the class action is this approach by Christian organizations that have been labeled hate groups by the SPLC. A scatter shot approach making them defend themselves all over America. And now we know which organization is directly behind the banning of conservatives on media platforms and through companies.

Leaders of Christian organizations the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) unfairly labels as "hate groups" told PJ Media that a massive legal onslaught is headed toward the SPLC — and it could involve as many as sixty separate lawsuits in different states around the country. Rather than one big defamation lawsuit, the left-wing attack dog will face a scattershot approach.

"What we're considering is not a class-action lawsuit," Mat Staver, founder and chairman of Liberty Counsel, a Christian nonprofit branded a "hate group" by the SPLC and currently suing the charity navigation site GuideStar, told PJ Media on Monday. "These are individual lawsuits that we're looking at, not class action."

He explained that the roughly 60 organizations considering the suit intend to "make the SPLC defend itself all over the country."

"The people we're talking to are looking at individual lawsuits — could be up to sixty but definitely quite a number of cases," Staver explained.


In June, the SPLC settled a defamation lawsuit from Maajid Nawaz, a Muslim reformer the group had defamed as an "anti-Muslim extremist." The leftist smear factory paid $3.375 million to Nawaz's anti-terrorism nonprofit, Quilliam International. That case was particularly egregious, as the SPLC called Nawaz an "extremist" for, among other things, going to a strip club on his bachelor party.

After the Nawaz settlement, Staver told PJ Media that "about 60 organizations" "have been considering filing lawsuits against the SPLC, because they have been doing to a lot of organizations exactly what they did to Maajid Nawaz."

PJ Media followed up, asking why the lawsuits have not yet been filed.

Jeremy Tedesco, senior counsel and vice president of U.S. Advocacy and Administration at Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), suggested that the organizations may be waiting for the outcome of other cases currently making their way through the courts. Some of these cases may test whether or not the leftist smear group can get away with defamation by claiming their "hate group" labels are merely a matter of opinion.

"What the SPLC does and what makes them so dangerous is that when they get sued they go to court and say, 'You can't sue us, it's just opinion,'" Tedesco explained. "But they know full well that everybody looks at their hate group list as fact. They treat it as fact, they like having these corporations listen to them." He noted that news organizations and companies like Amazon have "blindly accepted" the SPLC's "hate group" label against ADF. Amazon removed ADF from its Amazon Smile charity program due to the label.

"The SPLC loves it when others treat it like a fact and they treat it like a fact, but when they go to court they say it's just an opinion," the lawyer added.

"There are pending cases against SPLC right now where those questions could be answered," Tedesco said. "It's possible the court could say, 'No matter how much you say this is an opinion, it's a statement of fact.'''

https://pjmedia.com/trending/update...awsuits-against-the-splc-under-consideration/
 
Last edited:
I will be happy to see this group dismantled but then there could be bait and switch and these vermin move to a newly named evil intent group so who knows ?
 
Don't they 'consult' the FBI?
 
Back
Top