One of the four indictments against former president Donald Trump cites the violation of an 1870 law that is aimed at protecting the constitutional rights of American citizens.
Section 241 of Title 18 of the U.S. Code was originally adopted in the United States as part of the Enforcement Act of 1870, designed to protect the rights guaranteed under the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments. These amendments, collectively called Reconstruction Amendments, prohibited states from disenfranchising voters on the basis of “race, color, or previous condition of servitude.”
Members of the extremist group Ku Klux Klan aimed to prevent Black Americans from exercising their right to vote, serve on juries, and run for public office. Section 241 sought to prosecute Ku Klux Klan members for such activities.
According to Section 241, “if two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same,” such individuals shall be punished by law.
Violators of Section 241 can be fined and/or imprisoned for up to 10 years. In case the violation results in sexual abuse, kidnapping, or death, the accused can also be sentenced to life imprisonment or death.
Charges against Mr. Trump could potentially focus on the former president’s alleged attempt to overturn the results of the 2020 election—an action that could be argued as having threatened the lawful votes which American voters had cast in favor of Joe Biden.
Such actions by Mr. Trump could be construed as having infringed on the voting rights of U.S. citizens, thus violating Section 241 in the process.
Special counsel Jack Smith, who filed the indictment against Mr. Trump, insists that the former president’s claims about the election contributed to her death.
Previous Section 241 Cases
The U.S. Supreme Court had previously used Section 241 to prosecute crimes related to elections. For instance, in the 1974 Anderson v. United States case, petitioners were convicted of violating Section 241 for casting fictitious votes for federal, state, and local candidates.“The right to an honest [count] is a right possessed by each voting elector, and to the extent that the importance of his vote is nullified, wholly or in part, he has been injured in the free exercise of a right or privilege secured to him by the laws and Constitution of the United States,” the ruling said citing another court.
One of the memes showed an African American woman standing in front of an “African Americans for Hillary” sign. The meme instructed people to vote by text in the 2016 election. The DOJ charged Mr. Mackey with conspiring against the right to vote and arrested him in January 2021.
Charging Trump With Crimes
In an interview with Salon last month, Anthony Michael Kreis, a Georgia State University law professor, said that using Section 241 against Trump brings three benefits for the Department of Justice’s prosecutors.“First, the statute isn’t novel in terms of applying it to election fraud. Second, is that the DOJ can go after the election fraud scheme and tie it to the insurrection for enhanced penalties,” he said.
“Third, the combination of the first two benefits allows Trump to be tried for January 6th without litigating whether his speech before the riots at the Capitol, which would be the basis of a free-standing incitement charge, is protected by the First Amendment.”
“Essentially, Trump could be charged for entering a conspiracy to deprive persons of their rights guaranteed under the Constitution and that conspiracy caused bodily injury, which would increase the penalty for the unlawful conspiracy.”
News commentators have criticized the double standards involved in the Trump indictment. In an Aug. 2 video, media analyst Mark Dice said that Trump is being indicted for “trying to obstruct an official proceeding and trying to stop the counting and certification of the electoral votes,”
These are the same acts that many Democrats committed back in 2017 when they objected to Mr. Trump winning the 2016 election,” he pointed out.
In an interview with Fox, George Washington University Law Professor Jonathan Turley said that special counsel Mr. Smith “may be stretching the law a bit” with regard to Trump’s indictment.
“You'll notice that not being discussed in all of this is a conspiracy for incitement [or] seditious conspiracy,” he said while noting that these two claims were paramount in the second impeachment proceedings against Mr. Trump.
“Those were the claims that Democrats said were lead pipe cinches, where the evidence was absolutely clear … They do not appear thus far to be in this indictment, but we'll have to see.”
Opposing election results or speaking out against candidates is not a novel phenomenon in American politics.
“The people bringing these indictments seek to play kingmaker outside of the electoral process, knocking their opponents out of races in the most depraved and unscrupulous way possible,” she said.
“Unless Trump took clearly illegal action, fighting to win an election isn’t a crime. What a stark contrast to the way President Biden is being treated right now regarding the accusations leveled against him with Burisma Holdings.”
