Thread by @JohnFPfaff

These laws are never used as intended, and always metastasize to more-common actions. They are always written too broadly.

Like Salt Lake’s DA, who used a sloppily-written anti-gang law to thread two women w life sentences for… throwing paint.

Already we see states and the Feds trying to figure out how to push protesting behavior into something far worse.

We are already arresting and charging the insurgents. We don’t need new laws to get them.

“But what about investigations?”

It’s worth noting that the PATRIOT Act created a special “sneak and peek” warrant to target terrorism… which has been used almost entirely to go after routine drug cases.

Same thing will happen here.

The catch is clear: defining “domestic terrorist” will be hard.

I doubt there is clear statutory text that unambiguously distinguishes the Jan 6 insurgents from ppl surrounding the police station in Brooklyn Center, MN.

A determined DA will find a way.

In fact, it doesn’t even have to be a *strong* argument, just a viable-plausible one.

Just the threat can be chilling. And some will plead just to make the bigger threat go away.

Take the J20 defendants from Trump’s inauguration protests. Cases fell apart… after 20 pleas.

We already have the tools we need.

Expanded tools are always used in other areas.

For a political issue like this one, it’s going to rope in a lot of conduct ppl don’t want included.

Even weak arguments can have huge effects.