World
International terror defendants face longer prison terms than domestic counterparts, new study finds
People convicted of crimes related to domestic extremism face far shorter prison terms than those convicted in international terrorism cases, even when the crimes are similar, a new report on the outcomes of hundreds of federal criminal cases has found.
The first-of-its-kind analysis, completed by terrorism researchers at the University of Maryland, was provided exclusively to The Associated Press. It comes after federal officials and researchers have repeatedly identified domestic violent extremists such as white supremacists and anti-government groups as the most significant terror threat to the U.S. And it follows scrutiny of the outcomes of Jan. 6 cases, including for some Oath Keepers and Proud Boys who received sentences years lower than what was called for by prosecutors and sentencing guidelines.
President Joe Biden has echoed the concerns about domestic terrorism, calling it a “stain on the soul of America” and the “ most urgent terrorism threat ” faced by the country, yet the new analysis shows that on average, domestic extremists receive more lenient penalties.
“This research is significant in confirming empirically what many have long argued: international terrorism cases are sentenced more harshly than domestic cases, even when the conduct is the same, and that these disparities are due to a combination of differences in the law and biases in implementing them,” said Shirin Sinnar, a professor at Stanford Law School, who was not involved in the research but reviewed it at the request of the AP.
Researchers at the University of Maryland’s National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism, or START, and its Center for Health and Homeland Security examined federal criminal cases between 2014 and 2019 that were brought against people radicalized in the U.S. who were pursuing political, social, economic or religious goals.
International terrorism cases were defined by the researchers as those in which the defendants had links to or were acting in support of terrorist groups or movements based outside the U.S., while domestic cases involved defendants connected to groups or movements that operate primarily inside the U.S.
The analysis looked at 344 cases, including 118 international cases and 226 domestic cases, and found the disparities are caused by multiple factors, including the charges federal prosecutors choose to file, the laws that are on the books, as well as the sentencing decisions made by judges.
Jan. 6 cases are not included in the analysis, which has not yet been peer reviewed. START’s Michael Jensen, a principal investigator of the study, said 2019 was chosen as a cutoff to ensure final outcomes of even the most complex cases were captured. Still, he said, sentencing gaps in the Jan. 6 cases that he’s analyzed also reflect this disparity. Federal prosecutors have even taken the rare step of appealing the sentences of some Jan. 6 defendants, including leaders of the Oath Keepers and Proud Boys, some of whose sentences were years below what federal sentencing guidelines had laid out.
START’s analysis found wide disparities in prison terms for similar conduct, which were most pronounced in certain kinds of cases. The largest was in cases where defendants plotted violent attacks that ultimately failed or were foiled, where international defendants received an average prison sentence of 11.2 years, compared with 1.6 years for domestic defendants.
For violent cases that led to injuries, domestic defendants received on average 8.6 years, versus 34.6 for international defendants. The disparity was smaller, but still significant, in violent fatal attacks with domestic cases at about 28.8 years and international cases at about 39.2 years.
Even terms of supervision after prison showed differences, with people charged in domestic cases getting an average of 3.5 years, compared with more than 19 years supervision for international terrorism defendants. The researchers at START point out that this is despite evidence that the recidivism rate is about 50 percent for domestic extremists — about the same rate for all federal offenders — and “vanishingly low” for international terror defendants.
START controlled for factors already known to contribute to sentencing disparities, such as race, gender, criminal history and the use of so-called sentencing enhancements that increase the possible prison time for certain crimes. Even accounting for these other factors, international defendants still receive harsher punishments on average.
Pete Simi, a Chapman University sociologist who has studied extremism for decades, said the imbalance in treatment of domestic and international cases reflects differences in the broader criminal justice system.
“That imbalance extends well beyond the courts and sentencing but also infects policing and intelligence gathering and analysis,“ said Simi, who was not involved in the research.
Federal law makes a distinction between international and domestic terrorism. The State Department has formally designated dozens of groups operating abroad as foreign terror organizations and even marginal support to such groups that doesn’t result in violence can be punishable by up to 20 years in prison. There is no comparable designation for domestic extremists such as the Proud Boys, Atomwaffen or other groups with a history of violent plots and acts.
Sinnar, who has written extensively about terrorism cases, said the disparities are indicative of numerous biases throughout the criminal justice system.
“At least for Muslims, many cases that might be labeled ‘failed or foiled’ plots were likely plots generated by government informants trying to goad individuals into crimes in the first place, and then foil them in order to arrest the supposed perpetrators,” Sinnar wrote in response to AP questions.
“It’s exactly in these ‘preventative’ cases where you would expect to see the biggest differences — as opposed to the rarer cases that actually lead to fatalities, in which homicide charges are available regardless of the international/domestic distinction.”
Indeed, a federal judge in March freed three men convicted in a post-9/11 terrorism sting after deeming their lengthy sentences “unduly harsh and unjust.” The judge decried the FBI’s role in radicalizing them in a plot to blow up New York synagogues and shoot down National Guard planes, and reduced their mandatory minimum 25-year prison sentences imposed in 2011 to time served plus 90 days.
In the cases studied, terrorism-specific charges and sentencing enhancements that increase prison time were disproportionately applied to international defendants. Chief among those is the material support statute that can only be used for cases linked to international terrorist groups; a related statute that may be used for domestic terrorism was rarely invoked. Federal prosecutors used the international material support charge in 50 percent of international cases; it was just half a percent in domestic ones – a single case.
People charged in violent domestic cases also often faced less serious charges not often associated with crimes of terror, like illegal possession of firearms, the study found. The so-called terror enhancement that increases prison time was used in 60 percent of international cases, compared with just 15.4 percent in domestic ones.
George Varghese, a former national security prosecutor, said prosecutors had been hamstrung by how the law treats international terror differently than domestic extremism, but that courts also bear some responsibility.
“These domestic terrorists are being treated more like run-of-the-mill criminal defendants and receiving sentences far below those of international terrorism defendants,” he said.
One judge, U.S. District Judge Timothy Kelly, imposed terms years below the federal guidelines when he sentenced Proud Boys including ex-national chairman Enrique Tarrio and another leader, Zachary Rehl, both of whom were convicted of seditious conspiracy. The judge said at Rehl’s sentencing that he had assaulted law enforcement by spraying a chemical irritant at them, then lied about it at trial.
Still, Kelly sentenced Rehl to 15 years, half of the lowest amount set out in federal sentencing guidelines, as he mused: “I wonder if I will ever sentence someone to 15 years below the guidelines in my entire career.”
In both Tarrio and Rehl’s cases, the judge said their conduct wasn’t comparable to a scenario he would typically associate with terrorism, such as blowing up a building or taking up arms against United States troops, with an intent to kill.
In the end, terrorism experts and the study’s authors said they didn’t expect Congress to address these issues with new legislation anytime soon, but noted that there are current laws that could be used to help close the gap.
Jensen said the research found prosecutors were not always using all the laws available to them. When domestic extremists were charged with hate crime laws, for example, it wiped out the disparity, he said.
“The problem is, for the six years that we reviewed, the (hate crimes) charge was used 12 times. It was only used in cases that had extraordinary outcomes, in other words people died. Those are not typical terrorism events,” he said. “The use of hate crime laws would absolutely close the gap.”
The disparities are most apparent in lower-profile cases where Jan. 6 rioters assaulted police officers, Jensen told AP. He said he found that the average sentence for those defendants is 4.5 years.
”You can’t find a single case of an international terrorist who injured or hurt people who got less than 20 years in prison,” he said.
___
Reach AP investigative reporters Jason Dearen at jdearen@ap.org and Michelle R. Smith at mrsmith@ap.org
___
Contact AP’s global investigative team at Investigative@ap.org or https://www.ap.org/tips/
World
SZA Finally Releases Long-Delayed ‘Lana’ Album, Featuring Kendrick Lamar, Lil Yachty and Benny Blanco
SZA‘s long-awaited the deluxe edition of her Grammy-winning 2022 album “SOS,” which is titled “Lana,” has finally arrived. The album has been through a long series of false alarms — it seemed imminent back in February, when she released the song “Saturn” — and bears artwork similar to the insect-and-forest imagery featured during her tours last summer, but it’s finally here. Variety‘s full review of the album will appear this weekend.
The album features Kendrick Lamar on the track “30 for 30” (SZA appears on two songs on his recent “GNX” album) and production from Lil Yachty and Benny Blanco on one song each. Her collaborators on the other songs are largely “SOS” producers and writers like Michael Uzowuru, ThankGod4Cody, Rob Bisel, Carter Lang and others.
She previewed the album with a video for the song “Drive,” featuring Ben Stiller, on Thursday night. “Lana”‘s full tracklist appears below:
1 No More Hiding – produced by Michael Uzowuru
2 What Do I Do – produced by Benny Blanco, Carter Lang and ThankGod4Cody
3 30 for 30 feat. Kendrick Lamar – produced by J White
4 Diamond Boy (DTM) – produced by Carter, Scum, Solomonophonic, Declan and Michael Uzowuru
5 BMF – produced by Carter Lang, Blake Slatkin, Omer Fedi
6 Scorsese Baby Daddy – produced by Michael Uzowuru and Tyler Johnson
7 Love Me 4 Me – produced by Rob Bisel, Carter Lang and Nick Lee
8 Chill Baby – produced by Lil Yachty, Sad Pony, Cade, Calvin Dickinson, iseeyou and Julian Fried
9 My Turn – produced by ThankGod4Cody, Rob Bisel
10 Crybaby – produced by ThankGod4Cody, Carter Lang and Declan
11 Kitchen – produced by ThankGod4Cody
12 Get Behind Me (interlude) – produced by Michael Uzowuru
13 Drive – produced by ThankGod4Cody and Billy Lemon
14 Another Life – produced by Michael Uzowuru and Dylan Wiggins
15 Saturn – produced by Carter Lang, Rob Bisel, Solomonophonic and Monsune
SZA’s forthcoming stadium tour with Kendrick Lamar presents a prime opportunity to release new material — she’s been touring behind “SOS” since it was released two years ago.
The latest round of teasers began a week ago, on the two-year anniversary of “SOS,” with a short video trailer that included a snippet of one of the album’s tracks. The video depicts SZA in a nature setting, pulling down her baggy camo pants to pee by a creek. She looks directly into the camera before taking a tissue out of her pocket to wipe herself up as the words “Lana” appear across the screen. She lyrics to the song go, “You know we got a real history/That’s the reason I can’t choose me/You know that dick been good to me/You make it hard for me to choose me.”
While SZA has been talking about a deluxe edition of “SOS” since that album’s release, she explained the album and its to Variety in August of last year: “[‘Lana’] is outtakes [from ‘SOS’] and new stuff, too — I added a couple of songs. It’s like a whole new project. It’s called ‘Lana’ — my name but, it’s the first tattoo that I ever got, when I was 13. It was 10 bucks a letter and I only had 40, so that that became my nickname for no reason. ‘Lana’ is really just the B-side of SOS.”
The album seemed imminent in February when she released “Saturn,” but just a few weeks later, SZA became frustrated by fans leaking songs and posted that she would be “starting ‘Lana’ from scratch” because “y’all leaked three songs from the deluxe.” She continued, “At this point, y’all can keep the throwaways and leaks. I’ll be starting ‘Lana’ from scratch. Do not ask me about it again,” adding a few minutes later, “I’ll round up the leaks y’all already got and u can have those. Seems like a fair deal. ENJOY.” That tweet was deleted shortly afterward. In a subsequent series of tweets, she said the deluxe edition of SOS will now feature “the leaks and outtakes” and “Lana” will be its own album. “Lana deserves more time and music no one’s ever heard before,” she wrote. However, she seems to have reverted to her previous plan.
World
Malaysia agrees to resume 'no find, no fee' hunt for flight MH370, 10 years after plane disappeared
Malaysia’s government has agreed in principle to accept a second “no find, no fee” proposal from a U.S. company to renew the hunt for flight MH370, which is believed to have crashed in the southern Indian Ocean more than 10 years ago, Transport Minister Anthony Loke said Friday.
Loke said Cabinet ministers gave the nod at their meeting last week for Texas-based marine robotics firm Ocean Infinity to continue the seabed search operation at a new 15,000-square-kilometer (5,800-square-mile) site in the ocean next year.
MALAYSIA ANNOUNCES RENEWED PUSH TO FIND MH370 DECADE AFTER DISAPPEARANCE: ‘SEARCH MUST GO ON’
“The proposed new search area, identified by Ocean Infinity, is based on the latest information and data analyses conducted by experts and researchers. The company’s proposal is credible,” he said in a statement.
The Boeing 777 plane vanished from radar shortly after taking off on March 8, 2014, carrying 239 people, mostly Chinese nationals, on a flight from Malaysia’s capital, Kuala Lumpur, to Beijing. Satellite data showed the plane deviated from its flight path to head over the southern Indian Ocean, where it is believed to have crashed.
Flight officer Rayan Gharazeddine scans the water in the southern Indian Ocean off Australia from a Royal Australian Air Force AP-3C Orion during a search for the missing Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370, March 22, 2014. (AP Photo/Rob Griffith)
An expensive multinational search failed to turn up any clues, although debris washed ashore on the east African coast and Indian Ocean islands. A private search in 2018 by Ocean Infinity also found nothing.
Under the new deal, Ocean Infinity will get $70 million only if significant wreckage is discovered, Loke said. He said his ministry will finalize negotiations with Ocean Infinity in early 2025. The firm has indicated that January-April is the best period for the search, he said.
CLICK HERE FOR THE FOX NEWS APP
“This decision reflects the government’s commitment to continuing the search operation and providing closure for the families of MH370 passengers,” he added.
Ocean Infinity CEO Oliver Punkett earlier this year reportedly said the the company had improved its technology since 2018. He has said the firm is working with many experts to analyze data and narrow the search area to the most likely site.
A last-minute budget bill has passed in the United States House of Representatives to keep the federal government funded and running through mid-March, averting an impending shutdown.
The continuing resolution now progresses to the Senate with only hours to spare before the shutdown is slated to take effect on Saturday at 12:01am local time (05:01 GMT).
On Friday evening, the temporary budget legislation sailed through the House with an overwhelming 366 votes in support.
Only 34 representatives, all Republican, voted against the bill. One Democrat, Representative Jasmine Crockett of Texas, abstained by voting “present”.
“We are really grateful that tonight, in bipartisan fashion with overwhelming majority of votes, we passed the American Relief Act of 2025,” Mike Johnson, the House speaker, said in a news conference after the vote.
The stopgap bill, however, omitted one key issue that had stalled recent negotiations: the debt ceiling.
Normally, Congress weighs federal spending separately from the debt ceiling, which limits how much the government can borrow.
But this week, President-elect Donald Trump scuttled an earlier bipartisan bill in part because it did not extend or abolish the debt ceiling, which he compared with a “guillotine” dangling over his incoming administration.
The debt ceiling has become a divisive issue among Republicans, some of whom feared extending or eliminating it would pave the way for unfettered government spending.
Trump, for his part, threatened to set up primary challenges for any Republican who opposed his plan. He signalled that he preferred the debt ceiling debate to happen under the outgoing administration of President Joe Biden, a Democrat and his erstwhile election rival.
“Unless the Democrats terminate or substantially extend Debt Ceiling now, I will fight ‘till the end,” Trump said in a social media post on Wednesday. “This is a nasty TRAP set in place by the Radical Left Democrats! They are looking to embarrass us in June when it comes up for a Vote.”
Trump’s opposition to this week’s bipartisan legislation put him at odds with Johnson, another top Republican leader. Johnson’s predecessor for the speakership, Republican Kevin McCarthy, was ousted last year in a historic vote over his role in passing a bipartisan spending bill.
After the first bipartisan bill was scuttled on Wednesday, Trump backed another version that failed in the House a day later, on Thursday. All Democrats opposed it, as well as 38 Republicans.
Friday’s bill managed to restore Democratic support after closed-door negotiations. In his remarks after the vote, Johnson tried to cast the latest spending deal as a win for Trump’s America First economic platform.
“This is America First legislation, because it allows us to be set up to deliver for the American people,” Johnson said.
He also hinted at changes to come in January, when a new Congress is sworn in and Donald Trump takes office for a second term. When that happens, Republicans will hold majorities in both chambers of Congress.
“In January, we will make a sea change in Washington,” Johnson said. “Things are going to be very different around here. This was a necessary step to bridge the gap, to put us into that moment where we can put our fingerprints on spending for 2025.”
Like earlier bills, the temporary stopgap measure that passed on Friday contains approximately $10bn in farm aid and $100bn in disaster relief, a priority after the destruction of hurricanes like Helene and Milton.
But the sabre-rattling that had accompanied an earlier version of the bill had largely subsided by Friday night, with Trump allies like billionaire Elon Musk striking a conciliatory note.
Musk, who had decried a Wednesday version of the bill as “criminal”, praised Speaker Johnson after the vote on Friday night for streamlining the legislation.
“The Speaker did a good job here, given the circumstances,” he wrote on his social media platform X. “It went from a bill that weighed pounds to a bill that weighed ounces.”
Democrats, meanwhile, questioned Musk’s growing influence over the Republican Party. Musk is slated to advise Trump’s incoming administration in a new role, as part of a nongovernmental, yet-to-be-established agency known as the Department of Government Efficiency.
“Obviously, the thing Donald Trump wanted, he didn’t get,” Representative Jared Moskowitz of Florida told reporters as he walked down the Capitol steps. “It looks like Elon got some of the things he wanted. So that’s interesting.”
Moskowitz credited the Democrats for giving the Republicans the majority needed to pass the bill in the House, despite internal dissent within the right-leaning party.
“The drama that went on here for the last two days didn’t need to happen,” he said. “And we literally wound up in the same place we were always going to wind up in, which was the Democrats providing the majority of the votes to keep the government home open and deliver for the American people.”
Kansas State Lands Commitment From FCS Standout
Kentucky vs. Ohio State: Preview, Odds & How to Watch
U.S. Department of Justice sues Louisiana over prisoners being held past release dates
Why overdose deaths are declining in Maine
Florida man extradited to Maryland, held without bond for Frederick County double murder
Colorado Rockies game no. 116 thread: Zac Gallen vs José Ureña
Why Marjorie Taylor Greene was ‘kicked out’ of the Freedom Caucus according to Rep. Buck
See it: Tesla crashes into Columbus convention center at 70 mph
Fox News Politics: Georgia the whole day through
Death of missing Oregon girl found in stream ruled homicide
Biden considers commuting the sentences of federal death row inmates: report
Last-minute budget bill to prevent US government shutdown prevails in House
What a government shutdown could mean for your holiday travel plans
House vote imminent on plan to avert government shutdown after Trump-backed deal tanks
Italy's Deputy PM Salvini found not guilty in Open Arms migrants case
-
Politics1 week agoCanadian premier threatens to cut off energy imports to US if Trump imposes tariff on country
-
/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25782636/247422_ChatGPT_anniversary_CVirginia.jpg "Inside the launch — and future — of ChatGPT")
Technology1 week agoInside the launch — and future — of ChatGPT
-
/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25789444/1258459915.jpg "OpenAI cofounder Ilya Sutskever says the way AI is built is about to change")
Technology7 days agoOpenAI cofounder Ilya Sutskever says the way AI is built is about to change
-
Politics7 days agoU.S. Supreme Court will decide if oil industry may sue to block California's zero-emissions goal
-
/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25546252/STK169_Mark_Zuckerburg_CVIRGINIA_D.jpg "Meta asks the US government to block OpenAI’s switch to a for-profit")
Technology1 week agoMeta asks the US government to block OpenAI’s switch to a for-profit
-
Politics1 week agoConservative group debuts major ad buy in key senators' states as 'soft appeal' for Hegseth, Gabbard, Patel
-
Business5 days agoFreddie Freeman's World Series walk-off grand slam baseball sells at auction for $1.56 million
-
/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23951353/STK043_VRG_Illo_N_Barclay_3_Meta.jpg "Meta’s Instagram boss: who posted something matters more in the AI age")
Technology5 days agoMeta’s Instagram boss: who posted something matters more in the AI age