Terrorism material-support convictions required no proof of terrorist intent

Evidence

David Cole and James Lobel have argued that virtually all of those who in fact have been convicted of “material support” for terrorism in the United States (around fifty people) have been convicted of “a crime that requires no proof that the defendant ever intended to further a terrorist act.” Cole and Lobel also point out that “prosecutors have obtained a handful of convictions for conspiracy to engage in terrorism, [yet] several of those convictions rest on extremely broad statutes that don’t require proof of any specific plan or act, or on questionable entrapment tactics by government informants.” — Moustafa Bayoumi, How Does It Feel to Be a Problem? Being…, 1160

Categorization

• XREF: Direct evidence for the book’s core thesis that the security state punishes Muslim identity rather than terrorist conduct.