'Sovereign citizens: A narrative review with implications of violence towards law enforcement' by Christine M Sarteschi in (2021) 60 Aggressive and Violent Behavior 101509 comments
Extremist movements are growing in the United States. One concerning extremist group is that of sovereign citizens. Sovereign citizens have been labeled by the Federal Bureau of Investigation as a terrorist threat. Relative to other research about extremist groups, limited research exists about the sovereign citizen movement. The purpose of this article is to review all relevant literature concerning this movement, as it pertains to the threat posed to law enforcement, via descriptive research and to identify existing knowledge gaps. Most empirical work, about sovereign citizens, thus far has focused on legal matters, mental health, radicalization, and postdiction of targeted violence. The work presented here serves as a foundation for future research concerning this group.
In 2013, a survey of law enforcement intelligence officers rated sovereign citizens as being the top serious terrorist threat, even higher than Islamic terrorists (Carter et al., 2014). Sovereign citizens are a loosely affiliated group of individuals whose primary belief is the illegitimacy of the United States (U.S.) government. They are antigovernment extremists who claim to be above the law and whose origins can be traced back to the Posse Comitatus, tax protestors and militias (Loeser, 2015). Their ideology often overlaps with other far-right extremist groups. They are mostly known for committing acts of paper terrorism, the practice of filing frivolous, pseudolegal claims. These claims involve large sums of money, and are often aimed at government officials, whom they believe have wronged them (Loeser, 2015).
Most concerning are the sovereign citizens who have committed violent acts. Two incidents, one in Bunkerville, Nevada, and another at the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge, show their proclivity for violence. They pose a unique and significant threat to law enforcement during traffic stops (Smith, 2019) because of their reluctance to follow basic traffic and motor vehicle laws. Upon being stopped for a traffic infraction, sovereigns can become argumentative, combative and non-cooperative. They will often engage in conflict-oriented tactics such as demanding that officers prove jurisdiction, refusing to answer questions or insisting that they “do not consent” to the actions of law enforcement. Another common tactic is when asked to roll down their vehicle's windows, they will only crack the window, claiming that the window is broken. This makes communication difficult or impossible. Law enforcement often has no choice but to break the window and physically remove them from their vehicles. These are long, protracted interactions that can and have become deadly. Lethal force may erupt resulting in the death of the sovereign citizen or the police officer. Specific examples, of the latter, include the 2010 killing of two West Memphis, Arkansas law enforcement officers (LEOs) by father and son sovereign citizens. Another sovereign citizen shot and killed a California Highway Patrol (CHP) officer after being pulled over for an obstructed license plate (KPIX, 2013).
Despite the problems and threats posed, the sovereign citizen literature base remains quite limited. The primary goal of this research is to provide a narrative review of the literature, to summarize what is known to date and to review the violence aimed at law enforcement by sovereign citizens. This work will not focus on sovereign citizen beliefs and ideology, as that has been extensively described elsewhere (cf. Berger, 2016; Parker, 2014; Sarteschi, 2020). Finally, implications of the current state of affairs and suggestions for future areas of research are included.
