The United States indicted William White, webmaster of the white-supremacy website Overthrow.com, alleging that he solicited others to harm "Juror A," the foreperson of the jury that convicted Matt Hale, another white supremacist, of soliciting the murder of a federal judge in 2003.

The indictment alleged that White targeted Juror A in an article posted to the Overthrow.com front page entitled "The Juror Who Convicted Matt Hale."  The post allegedly read:

"Gay anti-racist [Juror A] was a juror who played a key role in convicting Matt Hale.  Born [date], [he/she] lives at [address] with [his/her] gay black lover and [his/her] cat [name]. [His/Her] phone number is [phone number]. . . ."

The government argued that White was "aware that individuals associated with the white supremacist movement, who were the target audience of 'Overthrow.com,' at times engaged in acts of violence directed at non-whites, Jews, homosexuals, and persons perceived by white supremacists as acting contrary to the interests of the white race."  (Indictment ¶ 5a.)  In order to corroborate the claim that White intended the post to incite violence against Juror A, the indictment also references previous posts by White in which he published the addresses of other white supremacist "targets," often with commentary enticing his readers to kill or otherwise harm these individuals.  (Indictment ¶¶ 5b-5e.)

A superseding indictment, filed on February 10, 2009, included more examples of previous Overthrow.com posts that advocated violence against white supremacist "targets."  White moved to dismiss both indictments, claiming that his article represented protected speech under the First Amendment and did not constitute a true threat.  Claiming bias, White also moved for recusal of all judges from the Northern District of Illinois.  Since this motion was unopposed, Judge Hibbler recused himself and was replaced by Judge Lynn Adelman of the Eastern District of Wisconsin.

In her July 21, 2009 order, Judge Adelman granted White's motion to dismiss, finding that his speech was protected under the First Amendment.  Specifically, she noted that the posts "do not expressly solicit or endeavor to persuade another person to harm Juror A. . . . nowhere in them does defendant expressly advocate that Juror A be harmed."  Analyzing prior case law, she goes on to state that "the cases relating to disclosure of personal information, even under threatening or intimidating circumstances, uniformly support the proposition that defendant's speech is protected."

The government has appealed the decision to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals.

UPDATE:

On June 28, 2010 the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit reversed the dismissal of an indictment against White, finding that the indictment was legally sufficient and the First Amendment issue is properly addressed by the requirement of proof beyond a reasonable doubt at trial, not by a dismissal of the indictment.

Since criminal solicitation is an inchoate crime, the act of asking another to commit a crime is the punishable act. The crime is complete once the words are spoken with the required intent. Whether the First Amendment protects White's right to post personal information turns on his intent in posting that information. If the intent was to request someone to harm the juror, then the crime of solicitation is complete. The Court of Appeals ruled that this is an inquiry into the facts and the inferences that may be drawn from the facts regarding White's intent, and is a question for the jury.

The Guardian Civic League has filed a class-action lawsuit on behalf of 2,300 black Philadelphia police officers against the Philadelphia Police Department for allegedly allowing its officers to post racist and offensive content on Domelights.com, a website focused on law enforcement. 

Guardian's three-count complaint claims that the Philadelphia Police Department engaged in the creation of a hostile work environment on the basis of race (42 U.S.C. § 1983), discrimination (42 U.S.C. § 1981), and conspiracy to interfere with civil rights (42 U.S.C. § 1985) when white officers, Does 1-10,000, posted racist content to the forum site.  

Guardian alleges that "an Active Duty Philadelphia Police Sergent" with the username 'McQ' founded and operated . . . . [t]he racially offensive website." Compl. ¶ 3. Guardian attached screenshots of various posts from Domelights.com, reading "Guns Don’t Kill People. Dangerous Minorites Do. How much longer can you ignore this?" and "adults can't speak proper English or spell at a 3rd grade level, but they can sing among 'theyselves' to lyrics of a rap song." Compl. ¶¶ 2, 7.  Guardian asserts that these "offensive postings . . .  are part of the intentional purpose of the creator of Domelights.com Sgt. 'McQ.'" Compl. ¶ 8.

Guardian asserts that "White police officers use Domelights.com at work, in front of African American Police Officers, and discuss the contents of this racist website, make jokes about it. "Compl. ¶ 5. Also, Guardian argues that the Police Department is aware of the website but although "African American Police Officers have complained to the Philadelphia Police Department regarding Domelights.com,  . . . no actions have been taken to restrict this website or to discipline those police officers responsible for its racially offensive and legally violative content." Compl. ¶ 48.

Guardian seeks a ban on "the operation and use of Domelights.com by Philadelphia Police Officers" as well as compensatory and punitive damges.  Compl. ¶ 10.

The Philadelphia police have not yet filed an answer to the complaint. 

Over a two-year period, Jessica Beaumont wrote and published over 1000 posts on a white supremacist forum called Stormfront White Nationalist Community, using the pseudonym "Jessy Destruction."

Here are some illustrations of her alleged postings: Regarding blacks moving to western Canada, she wrote, “It could get worse, lets just cross our fingers and hope they all die off from AIDS.” Regarding mixed-race relationships, she wrote, "Ever seen a tar black negroid and a chink? That’s a pretty sick/funny site," and she recalled witnessing a white man “with a veiled muslim that looked fresh off the boat, with the mud baby in the stroller!” Regarding Jews, she wrote, "I don’t understand why someone would attack helpless dogs [as] opposed to going after those dirty Jewish animals directly," and, "I believe that Jews are literally spawn of Satan himself." In one post she summed up her feelings for non-whites as follows: "I just don’t feel the need to be-friend non-whites, as they can do nothing for me, nor would I like to associate with them. I am fine with my own kind, and always will/have been. Theres my f*cking answer. Good enough?"

In January 2006, Richard Warman, an Ottawa-based lawer who specializes in human rights law, filed a complaint against Beaumont before the Candian Human Rights Tribunal. He alleged that, by publishing discriminatory statements on the Internet, Beaumont had exposed individuals and minority groups to hatred and/or contempt in violation of the Canadian Human Rights Act. The Canadian Human Rights Commission, of which Warman formerly was a member, participated in the litigation.

After a hearing, the tribunal found for Warman, and entered an order prohibiting Beaumont from communicating similar hate messages through the Internet in the future. The tribunal also ordered her to pay special compensation of $3,000 (Canadian) to Warman for discriminatory statements written against him, including calling him "that retarded jew warman." (Although Warman is not Jewish, the tribunal reasoned that "it is obvious that Ms. Beaumont perceived him as such.") Additionally, the tribunal levied a $1,500 (Canadian) penalty against Beaumont, payable to the government of Canada.

During the hearing, avowed neo-Nazi Paul Fromm testified on Beaumont's behalf, and while not a lawyer, provided Beaumont with assistance.

(Candian Dollar amounts were converted into U.S. Dollars for purposes of the "Verdict or Settlement Amount" field.)