C

 

The Daily Signal

June 4, 2023

By Tyler O’Neil

 

In order to win a defamation lawsuit, the person suing must convince the court and ultimately the jury that the slanderer didn’t just publish something false, but that he did so even while suspecting that the attack was false.

Immigration enforcement activist D.A. King’s lawsuit against the Southern Poverty Law Center made it to the discovery process while so many other lawsuits have failed precisely because King showed that the SPLC had reason to doubt the truth of its claim that his organization, the Dustin Inman Society, was an “anti-immigrant hate group.” In fact, the SPLC had explicitly stated that the society was not a “hate group” in 2011, but it reversed course in 2018, right after registering a lobbyist to oppose a bill the society supported.

As I wrote in my book “Making Hate Pay,” the SPLC routinely brands mainstream conservative and Christian organizations “hate groups,” putting them on a map with chapters of the Ku Klux Klan. This smear inspired a terrorist attack in 2012, but when conservatives sue to defend their good names in court, they repeatedly fail, in part because they do not allege that the SPLC itself doubted the “hate group” smear.

King can claim that, and newly revealed evidence bolsters his claim even further.

According to an article King unearthed on the SPLC website, not only did the SPLC state publicly that his group was not a “hate group” before it reversed course, but an SPLC whistleblower who went on to describe the SPLC’s “hate” accusations as a “highly profitable scam” had himself been involved in the SPLC’s monitoring of King’s organization. He even quoted a source who stated that an early version of King’s organization was not a “traditional ‘hate’ group.”

RELATED: SPLC to Face the Music for ‘Hate Group’ Defamation as Lawsuit Clears Major Hurdle

In 2019, the SPLC fired its co-founder, Morris Dees, amid a racial discrimination and sexual harassment scandal that barely made a blip in the legacy media. At the time, a former SPLC employee by the name of Robert Moser published an article, “The Reckoning of Morris Dees and the Southern Poverty Law Center” in The New Yorker.

Moser wrote about the guilt he “couldn’t help feeling about the legions of donors who believed that their money was being used, faithfully and well, to do the Lord’s work in the heart of Dixie. We were part of the con, and we knew it.” He wrote that SPLC staffers would chat “about the oppressive security regime, the hyperbolic fund-raising appeals, and the fact that, though the center claimed to be effective in fighting extremism, ‘hate’ always continued to be on the rise, more dangerous than ever, with each year’s report on hate groups.”

“‘The S.P.L.C.—making hate pay,’ we’d say,” he wrote. “It was hard, for many of us, not to feel like we’d become pawns in what was, in many respects, a highly profitable scam.”

Moser’s revealing article has become even more important since he published it in 2019. Moser himself wrote for the Intelligence Project, the SPLC division that produces the “hate group” list. In fact, he also wrote an article about King back in 2005, in which one of Moser’s sources said the first version of King’s organization—known as American Resistance—was not a hate group…. please read the entire article here.

 

 

We fight illegal immigration in Georgia.

Thanks to a generous pro-enforcement donor, Mr. James Abely, and a patriotic station owner, Mr. Wesley Cox, the below audio is running several times an hour today and this weekend on the 10K watt WCGA radio station in Glynn County Georgia, which is adjacent to I-95.

More coming.

 

• OCGA 20-3-66  – Determination of in-state resident status of students for tuition or fees

Plea for passage of legislation inaccurate

In an introduction to a recent guest column aimed at pending state higher education legislation on the AJC’S “Get Schooled” blog AJC columnist Maureen Downey leads readers to believe that refugees cannot access instate tuition in Georgia’s public colleges.

In the column (“Afghan women refugees like me want a future in Georgia”) writer Husnia Jamal, apparently a refugee, also laments “But I, like so many other displaced people living in Georgia, found out that I could not access in-state tuition here — no matter how long I live, work, or pay state taxes — because of my immigration status.” As she is migrating to Georgia from Afghanistan, Jamal could also be an ‘SIV’ (Special Visa Immigrant).

A quick look at the Board of Regents webpage on instate tuition eligibility illustrates the truth: ”…lawful permanent residents, refugees, asylees, or other eligible noncitizens may be extended the same consideration as citizens of the United States in determining whether they qualify for in-state classification.” This includes SIV recipients.

Correction requested.

D.A. KING

PRESIDENT, THE DUSTIN INMAN SOCIETY

MARIETTA, GA. 30066

_

Reply, soon after (thirteen minutes) I emailed my letter for consideration to be published:

Hello D.A.,

This is the passage in full from the reference you cite:

A non-citizen student shall not be classified as in-state for tuition purposes unless the student is legally in this state and there is evidence to warrant consideration of in-state classification as determined by the Board of Regents. Lawful permanent residents, refugees, asylees, or other eligible noncitizens as defined by federal Title IV regulations may be extended the same consideration as citizens of the United States in determining whether they qualify for in-state classification.

As you know from your advocacy, this has long been an issue with public colleges in Georgia. It’s affected straight-A students who arrived here as minors that I know of personally, and who could not pursue a college education in Georgia.

If nothing else, IMHO, the word “may” above (as opposed to say “shall”) leaves ample room for interpretation, good, bad or indifferent, as to who’s eligible for in-state tuition, especially when combined with how the “evidence” mentioned of above is assessed.

So, to my mind, no correction’s warranted to the Op-Ed.

Thanks for continuing to read the AJC.

All best,

Andre Jackson

Opinion Editor

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

Andre.Jackson@ajc.com

” src=”blob:https://newdustininmansociety.org/467b2b6b-21d0-4ae0-8dc7-db6788fc58a6″ alt=”image001.png” width=”210.5″ border=”0″ class=”Apple-web-attachment Singleton” style=”width: 2.9305in; height: 0.4444in; opacity: 1;”>

Case Name:	King et al v. The Southern Poverty Law Center, Inc.
Case Number:	2:22-cv-00207-WKW-JTA
Filer:
Document Number:	25

Docket Text:

UNIFORM SCHEDULING ORDER:

• On-the-record Final Pretrial Conference set for 9/19/2024 in Montgomery, AL before Honorable Judge William Keith Watkins;
• Jury Selection & Trial set for 10/21/2024 in Montgomery, AL before Honorable Judge William Keith Watkins;
• Dispositive & Daubert Motions due by 5/16/2024;
• Mediation Notice due by 4/21/2024;
• Amended Pleadings due by 7/24/2023;
• Discovery due by 4/16/2024, as further set out in order.

Signed by Honorable Judge William Keith Watkins on 5/24/2023. (furn: Calendar, wr) (bes, )