The federal and state charges in the Michigan militia kidnapping plot are interesting; this is a thread about them. I should note I've tracked over 200 right-wing terrorist incidents in the U.S. (and many other r-w criminal incidents), which has given me some insight into how

common or rare certain charges or prosecutorial approaches are. I should note my background is in extremism, though--not the law.

The case is unusual in that it has "split" charges. Six of the defendants were charged federally, while the rest were charged by the state of

Michigan. In most cases, either the feds prosecute or the state prosecutes (often because the feds may not be interested in the case), but not both. There are also cases--typically involving high-profile extremist murders--where the feds and the state both prosecute the same

person. But here, the feds are prosecuting some people, the state others, with no overlap. With regard to right-wing extremism cases (I can't speak for other types of cases), this is rare. I'm curious how those decisions were made.

The six people charged federally are all

charged with conspiracy to commit kidnapping. There have been previous right-wing kidnapping and attempted kidnapping cases. One of the more recent--also a federal case--involved a sovereign citizen plot to kidnap a judge and a sheriff ( https://www.justice.gov/usao-wdtn/pr/tennessee-woman-pleads-guilty-aiding-and-abetting-attempt-kidnap-judge-and-sheriff-one). This was

successfully prosecuted. There is often a degree of inherent risk in attempted kidnapping cases, simply because no kidnapping actually occurred, allowing arguments that defendants really hadn't intended to kidnap anyone. In 2000, for example, a state prosecution of high profile

far right leader Bo Gritz for attempted kidnapping failed, with Gritz being acquitted (see https://www.nytimes.com/2000/03/09/nyregion/militia-leader-acquitted-of-plotting-to-kidnap-boy.html) even though there was substantial evidence against him. One has to hope that in this Michigan case the evidence will be enough to convince a jury.

The Michigan state charges included material support for an act of terrorism, gang membership, and weapons charges (carrying a firearm in commission of a felony).

The material support charges are highly interesting. First, state terrorism laws aren't used all that often in

general (except for terroristic threat provisions). Second, I'm pretty sure this is the first ever state-level "material support" charge to be laid against right-wing extremists (and possibly anybody). Even on the federal level, I can only recall one material support case (the

very recent and unusual boogaloo/Hamas case). It looks like Michigan's material support law was passed after the 9/11 attacks; I'll bet the framers didn't anticipate this use. The law is here: http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(p05yzphbtem4jktpthuwwxyf))/mileg.aspx?page=GetObject&objectname=mcl-750-543k. One can presume the people charged with this crime were

not the ones most centrally involved with the kidnapping plot itself (or they would have been charged federally with the others). So it will be interesting to see what prosecutors say constituted the material support, and if a jury will agree.

The gang membership charges are

also interesting. Unlike material support, gang charges/enhancements are often applied against right-wing extremists--but typically against white supremacists who are part of entities commonly recognized as gangs (such as skinhead gangs, street gangs, and prison gangs). I don't

recall a state ever trying to use a gang law against a militia group--though it is possible that it has happened and I've forgotten it. At the very least, I can say it's rare. Here is Michigan's gang membership law: http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(yh4enagg4k5p2dxytbxhwecm))/mileg.aspx?page=GetObject&objectname=mcl-750-411u. You can see that this law defines

"gang" very loosely; indeed, under these criteria almost any entity could be considered a gang. I don't know if that would make the law vulnerable to a challenge that it was too vague (that's a place where my "not a lawyer" handicap comes into play).

I'll also note that this

statute is incredibly harsh. Basically, if you commit or attempt to commit a felony that is connected to gang membership, you can be sentenced up to 20 years in prison. This could theoretically mean you could end up spending far more time in prison for the gang membership than

for the felony itself.

In any case, it will be interesting to see if prosecutors can get the jury or juries to agree the militia group was a gang.

The last type of charge, the weapons charge, is more or less basic & doesn't present any novelty or twists so far as I can see.