This article is a review of the Sovereign Citizens Movement. The movement is looked at objectively from multiple standpoints to gain a better insight on how to mitigate the threat to National security of the United States and its citizens. The course of discussion reviews the origin of the organization along with recruiting trends and demographic makeup. Additionally, the ideology is discussed as well as the methodology used by adherents of the movement. A look is given at capabilities and forecasting potential future actions of the movement. It is hoped that with an in-depth understanding of the Sovereign Citizen Movement an effective strategy can be designed and implemented to minimize potential future terrorist attacks. This report lays out preferred collection methods to utilize against the movement and recommends the Federal Bureau of Investigation as the lead agency in this endeavor. A select few methods and techniques of analysis are recommended specifically for use on Sovereign Citizen intelligence collection. Those methods recommended and discussed are Open Source Intelligence (OSINT), Human Intelligence (HUMINT) and Signals Intelligence (SIGINT). Brainstorming is recommended as an overarching technique to contribute to the Red Team and Indicators of Change methods. Finally, the paper addresses four strategies aimed preventing and minimizing future attack from the organization. The strategies suggested are a propaganda initiative; law enforcement education and procedural changes; the crippling monetary success of the movement; legislative and regulatory actions aimed at addressing common tactics. It is suggested that if the strategies are effectively implemented the Sovereign Citizen movement may eventually die off from attrition.
Sovereign Citizens: A Danger to America
The Sovereign Citizen Movement is a growing anti-government culture that poses a significant menace and danger to the United States of America. Providing an in-depth accurate analysis of the Sovereign Citizen Movement has its challenges. As the name indicates it is a movement and much about it is better understood as such rather than an organization. This is primarily due to the decentralized and often independent nature of its members, which serves to benefit the organization from a detection perspective. Nevertheless, as this paper will lie out there are commonalities that can be identified by the majority of those who consider themselves Sovereign Citizens.
As with any organization, it is ideal to research and understand their origins to better understand the populace that it attracts. The Sovereign Citizen Movement is no exception to this rule. The true origins of the Sovereign Citizen Movement are difficult to track, however, there is a general consensus that they spawned out of the single group Posse Comitatus in the early 1970’s (League, 2010). It appears that pockets of followers adopted the “right-wing anarchist ideologies” of Posse Comitatus and continued to evolve beyond the original parent (ACTIC, 2008). Though Posse Comitatus lost momentum and eventually died out the Sovereign Citizens continued to evolve and grow (Turner, n.d.).
The sovereign movement appears to grow in popularity with the ebb and flow of government dissatisfaction. This is seen at times of recession and other turmoil typically perceived as poor governance by the population (Turner). This is not a surprising phenomenon given their extremist anti-government ideology. Likewise in times of patriotism, the following appears to level out and even decrease. This was demonstrated after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, while the Nation initially pulled together against a common enemy. While the short-lived patriotism may have slowed growth, the Great Recession, and political division has contributed to overall growth of both the Sovereign Citizen Movement, as well as that of militias. One report shows that “militias in the United States jumped from 42 in 2008 to 334 in 2011” (Bjelopera, The Domestic Terrorist Threat:, 2013, p. 29). Most estimates indicate that the Sovereign Citizen Movement consists of around 300,000 members (Sovereign Family Network & Bjelopera, 2013).
Leadership and Structure. Though the Sovereign Citizens lack a centralized organizational model, they do have some prominent figures and representative organizations throughout the community. The most notable of organizations is Rightway L.A.W., it is one of the most active groups in the country. Headquartered in Akron, Ohio it includes 15 chapters spread across at least 10 states (Anti-Defamation League, 2010). Most of the better-known individuals in the movement are better described as gurus rather than leaders. In many ways, these prominent individuals seem driven by a financial opportunity rather than an ideological purpose.
Composition. Though the majority of the Sovereign Citizens are white middle aged or older males they have expanded to encompass women and most races over the last two decades (Anti-Defamation League, 2010).
The Sovereign Citizen movement is a loosely knit organization of U.S. citizens that share an extremist ideological view regarding the United States Government. As such, the members of the movement confess, believe, and actively work to demonstrate that they are “sovereign” and not under the rule or subject to the authority of the United States government or representatives. This includes, but is not limited to, “courts, taxing entities, motor vehicle departments, or law enforcement” (FBI, 2010).
Due to the decentralized nature of the organization (or lack thereof), ideology varies among members (Bjelopera, CRS Insights, 2014). In fact, the Sovereign Citizens as the name implies, consider themselves “Private Sovereign State Citizens that are acting in the capacity of human beings” rather than belonging to an organization (Sovereign Family Network). It is more appropriate to state they believe themselves divorced from a corporation, as becomes evident in their ideology. Despite this fact, there are still common beliefs that are prevalent among the members. Those common beliefs are what will be addressed further here. As an organization, they hold strong anti-government, anti-tax, and anti-regulation sentiments (Bjelopera, CRS Insights, 2014).
At the core of the Sovereign movement is the belief that the federal government has been corrupted. The how, when and where of these events vary among the movement; however, the resulting belief is relatively unified in that the tyrannical government is currently exercising a corrupt illegitimate rule. Sovereigns refer to the legitimate original government as “du jure” and the current illegitimate government as “de facto” (League, 2010).
The basis for the movement’s belief typically revolves around the 14th amendment of the U.S. Constitution. The argument is that after the financial hardships of the Civil War the Congress formed a corporation under the name of “The United States of America” in 1871. The purpose behind this incorporation was to facilitate a contractual agreement with foreign investors utilizing the citizens as collateral. Under this belief, those who accept U.S. citizen status are surrendering their rule to the corporation (government). Sovereigns basically believe that the government corporation’s contractual ownership is tied to volunteer service (military, federal servants), business incorporation, and the all-encompassing birth certificate name. Through these methods, the government corporation is allowed authority through commerce laws over the “member corporations” and “paper persons” (Sovereign Family Network). It is the belief of the Sovereign Citizens that through various procedures, typically administrative actions, that they can nullify the contractual agreement and declare their royal sovereignty subject only to God and/or Common Law.
Racial expansion. While it is true that the Sovereign Citizen Movement’s roots mix with the white supremacy found in Posse Comitatus, that ideology does not appear to be embodied in the modern beliefs of the movement. This is not to say that members (or groups) may not individually hold such beliefs, however, in large the organization does not profess them. In fact, the effort instead seems to be aimed at an “us vs. them” approach with the adherents being the “us” and the government representing “them”. An example of this unified recruiting approach is found in the popular Sovereign Citizen handbook “The Global Sovereign’s Handbook”. In the handbook, Johnny Liberty claims that the original Constitution’s destruction and failure were related directly to the racial, gender, and religious exclusions at the time. Liberty then professes that in order to avoid the same failures in the future “We the People must embrace the diversity of all cultures, religions[sic] and races” (Liberty, 2004, p. 143). This point is further evidenced by the strong growth of the African American population embracing the Sovereign Citizen ideologies (League, 2010).
GOALS & OBJECTIVES
When attempting to determine the goals and objectives of the Sovereign Citizen Movement it is important to separate them from paramilitary groups, but it is also important to recognize that it is reasonable to assume that many Sovereign Citizens may also participate in other organizations such as militias or the like. As previously discussed, the Sovereign Citizen Movement is just that, a movement, and as a result, has no formal structure. This interesting setup leaves it more of an ideology that individuals embrace rather than an organization they join. While there are various websites that solicit membership, a majority of those seem typically aimed at selling needed educational material and providing access to an online community.
The ultimate goal of the Sovereign Citizen Movement is to expose the corrupt corporation government and strip it of its power. From an organizational perspective, this is advocated and accomplished via education and terrorism.
Education on the ideology and methodology of the Sovereign Citizen Movement is abundant online via numerous websites, forums, and the like.
Communication and propaganda. The internet has been a valuable asset to the Sovereign movement in many ways. It has allowed the marketing and dissemination of information to the masses. Creating a relatively simple process compared to traditional non-internet methods. It allows mentors to market videos and upcoming seminars for training and recruitment purposes. Additionally, it has allowed the sharing of templates and samples of their pseudo-legal paperwork utilized to harass the government systems. Finally, the internet has facilitated the creation on online depositories for Sovereign Citizens to post their documents when government agencies refuse them; facilitating a feeling of accomplishment within the community (League, 2010).
Terrorist activities. Paper Terrorism is one of the favored methods of the movement toward accomplishing their goals. Whether it is tax evasion, harassment of individual or organizations, or achieving their sovereignty the Sovereign Citizens heavily utilizes paperwork as their means to an end. The movement does this in a variety of ways. A common indicator of the Sovereign Citizen paperwork is the perversion of existing codes and processes as well as pseudo-legal writings (League, 2010). Their use of paper terrorism covers a variety of purposes such as “frivolous/harassing lawsuits, bogus liens, fictitious financial instruments, phony arrest warrants, fictitious vehicle related documents to include license plates and driver’s license, the misuse of IRS forms and other “Common Law Court” documents” (ACTIC, 2008).
While the majority of Sovereign Citizens acts are non-violent there are those who have exercised violence to accomplish their goals. One of the most notable acts of violence with Sovereign Citizen ties is that of the Oklahoma City Federal building bombing. Terry Nichols, an accomplice in the act was a Sovereign Citizen (League, 2010). It’s worthy of mentioning here that until the attacks of 9/11 this incident was the single most devastating act of terrorism on American soil. So, while large-scale attacks may not be a common occurrence of the movement it is definitely in their repertoire. Additionally, there have been numerous incidents of individuals associated with the Sovereign Citizen Movement that has engaged in acts of violence, most often with law enforcement officers (Bjelopera, The Domestic Terrorist Threat:, 2013).
Equipment. Due to the lack of organizational structure of the Sovereign Citizens, it is not likely that they will in the near future possess sophisticated weaponry beyond commercially purchased small arms. The lack of a concerted effort makes the probability of lone shooter attacks highly probable by the members prone to violence. Nonetheless, the lack of sophisticated weaponry should not lead one to conclude they are not capable of mass scale attacks. The Oklahoma bombing proved otherwise. It is likely that future attempts at medium to large scale attacks will be conducted by improvised explosives, however, attempts at bioterrorism should not be ruled out.
There is a strong anti-government sentiment that binds the Sovereign Citizen Movement. This understanding allows a logical conclusion of the type of events and circumstances that may elicit a terrorist response from its followers. It is reasonable to expect that the promoters of the movement will exploit any controversial government action, event or situation. This is repeatedly demonstrated by the movements more vocal representatives as a quick look at recruiting material will demonstrate (Liberty, 2004). While the followers will find fault continually with virtually any federal government action, it is suspected that they will have a higher rate of successful recruiting during highly publicized controversial events that receive large-scale media coverage.
Beyond recruiting success, it is reasonable to believe there is a higher chance of violence by the members as a retaliatory act for circumstantial events. In their minds, it is the straw that broke the camel’s back so to say. Due to the disorganized nature of the followers, it is difficult to predict where or who may perform the act, however, it is probable that it will be aimed at the government. There is also potential that it will directly target the object of controversy.
While a large scale attack is a potential threat the more likely threat is that of individual skirmishes. From the Sovereign Citizen perspective, they are a victim of corruption, as a result, they continue to grow a hateful animosity toward authority. This anger and potential for violence are unique to each individual and virtually impossible to predict without specific intelligence on the individual. For one individual a traffic stop may cause a retaliatory act while a tax bill may cause it for another. The key to mitigating this risk is diligent analysis and follow-up of intelligence that indicates an individual is potentially dangerous.
Countering the Sovereign
Sovereign Citizens as identified in part one of these reports are a domestic terrorist group that poses danger to the United States and its citizens in a variety of ways. As such, it is critical that a valid effort is given to forecasting, identify and mitigate their effectiveness through adequate intelligence measures. This paper specifically addresses recommended collection approaches and analysis methods. While in many ways a holistic approach at the goal of collection and analysis is a prudent one the paper seeks to narrow the options down to a select few choices that offer the most reward for effort and expense.
Of note, this paper will reference the Sovereign Citizens as an organization for ease of readability, however, it should be noted that in many ways it is a movement and at best loosely fits that title.
The Collection Effort
In order to adequately counter and mitigate terrorist activities of the Sovereign Citizens a proper intelligence collection effort must be implemented. A single program or discipline solution would likely fail to produce the aforementioned desired results; therefore a combined approach is the ideal solution. Below this paper discusses various programs that will serve the effort. These programs were selected utilizing a Red Team Analysis approach (US Government, 2009). While all disciplines listed have a specific role and benefit to the collection, this paper has listed them in the suggested order of precedence.
Viable Collection Options
Open Source Intelligence (OSINT). A great deal of information is available on the Sovereign Citizens through publicly available sources. The strong anti-government underpinnings of the Sovereign Citizen organization foster an atmosphere of paranoia among its followers (League, 2010). This paranoia, in turn, poses challenges to members in the area of recruitment and establishing a connection with others who share the same beliefs. These factors establish the internet as an ideal medium for organization members to recruit, collect, market and focus organizational objectives.
From a broad collection effort, there is much to be garnered via open source gathering. The intelligence community (IC) can gather training and seminar event info easily and follow up with other collection and rapport building efforts by agents at such events.
Additionally, a typical Sovereign Citizen likely has a great amount of frustration at the injustice perpetrated by a fraudulent government, as well as the willful ignorance of the sheepish society surrounding them. Social media sites, such as Facebook and various forums offer a great outlet for such emotional angst. Furthermore, it could potentially provide evidence (in form of a threat) suitable for the prosecution of offending members, though the case of Elonis vs. The US made indictment more challenging (United States Courts, 2015). Nonetheless, a threat-laden post from a member would likely provide a great tool for potentially leveraging informant cooperation from less devoted followers.
This is a fortunate circumstance for the IC as it provides a multitude of available information that is easily accessible without typical Constitutional considerations of other collection methods. The information is publicly available and, therefore, does not require the same level of bureaucracy compliance to ascertain. A potential offensive collection effort could be completed by a (covert) government hosted Sovereign Citizen website. One thing strongly lacking in the community is a consolidated movement. Strategic creation and a robust marketing effort could allow the IC to fill this vacuum with a subversive program. While utilizing the site to entrap individuals would likely pose legal challenges simply utilizing it as a collection and propaganda tool should pose no such problem.
Human Intelligence (HUMINT). HUMINT can be a very effective collecting method on the Sovereign Citizen organization. Though the organization has a deep rooted hate toward the system and does typically hold a loose Theistic base they do not hold stringent ideology on most aspects of other facets of life (various sects are an exception to this) (Weir, 2015). This makes infiltrating the organization and befriending key players in the movement a relatively simple task of rapport building rather than elaborate infiltration measures. Additionally many in the movement are likely inclined to befriend a government employee or a sympathizer on the inside for their own intelligence collection, marketing, and general curiosity. For the more involved citizens, it lends credibility to their seminar, manual etc… with the claim of an inside source (Stitcher). This unique desire provides an excellent environment for simplified infiltration, negating many of the logistical requirements to create a deep cover persona.
Furthermore, many of the better known and active Sovereign Citizens seem to be driven by financial gain. While only they know whether they actually believe the doctrine they promote, they promote it nonetheless. This energetic and ambitious drive to market the movement as a business endeavor creates a welcoming atmosphere for HUMINT networking and collection operations.
Signals Intelligence (SIGINT). SIGINT has an advanced role in the collection of intelligence against the domestic Sovereign Citizens movement. Once a firm, individual or organizational targets have been identified and necessary legal prerequisites have been met, interception of communications could provide excellent intelligence. The fact that Sovereign’s often engage in various forms of low-end fraud assists in gaining the legal grounds necessary for legal eavesdropping measures (League, 2010). If patience is exercised while building the case and identifying the networked criminals, individual cells can likely be taken down in broad sweeps.
The intelligence collection effort against the Sovereign Citizens movement would be best served as a collective effort by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and National Security Agency (NSA). Those organizations and their respective roles are elaborated below.
Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). It is recommended that the FBI act as lead agency in the collection effort on the Sovereign Citizen Movement. The FBI list combating terrorism as it “top investigative priority”, as such this effort falls well within their scope of priorities and capabilities (FBI). When appropriate the FBI can interact with other agencies as necessary. One expected relationship would be with the NSA for the collection of specified SIGINT as discussed previously.
Preferred Analysis Strategies
The reality is that analytical approach should not be restricted to a few select methods, however, this paper intends to offer a few chosen methods for their likely effectiveness with this particular group. If the intelligence officer or organization is limited in time or resources then the below recommendations would be an excellent choice to invest in. If there are no such burdens on the analyst team them it is recommended that other methods are explored as well in an attempt to fill potential gaps as well eliminate other potential conditions not identified by the below methods.
The Chosen Few
Brainstorming. Brainstorming is a recommended technique that will likely provide a beneficial hypothesis for incorporation and consideration in the more in-depth analytical approaches.
Red Team Analysis. Utilizing Red Team Analysis strategy is a common sense approach to this domestic threat. While the members/followers of the organization carry some wild and eccentric beliefs these are easily understood by studying training and doctrinal material. The fact that the members are American greatly reduces some of the typical biases the analysts have to overcome. A look into the makeup of the Sovereign Citizen organization provides a solid profile mindset to analyze from.
Research consistently shows that Sovereigns typically fall into three types:
- The first types are those with financial hardships. Those in financial duress are drawn to the movement because it provides both a fault (government) and solution (fraudulent gains).
- The second types of members are those that have disdain for the government and its regulations. The movement validates this emotional position as well as provides solutions for retaliation.
- The third group that members fall into is con artists and gets rich types.
Understanding these mindsets and motivational factors the analyst can strategize a course of action and counter-measures appropriate (League, 2010). Additional demographic information is available and should be utilized while conducting the analysis. An important consideration on demographics is the sect/cell that is being targeted for analysis. Over the course of time, the Sovereign Organization has grown from a typical demographic makeup of middle-aged white males to a much more diverse organization encompassing virtually most demographic markers (League, 2010).
Indicators of Change. The indicators of change analytical review are highly recommended for sustainable countermeasures against the Sovereign Citizens. Due to the movements, heavy reliance on seminar based training and recruitment trends often develop among their motives and methods. Special attention should be paid to successful fraudulent or retaliatory accomplishments by the group as these will likely be repetitively tried by other members.
Countering the Culture. A strong effort should be made in countering the Sovereign Citizens’ movement via a culture war. As a decentralized movement that deeply relies on emotion to recruit new members, the movement can be hampered by a counter-propaganda effort. There are many ways in which a concerted effort could greatly diminish the group’s recruitment and with time cause it to die away. A few propaganda point are recommended below:
- Play up racist background: The movement has gained success over the last decades of moving away from its racial origins found heavily is Posse Comitatus(ACTIC, 2008). Propaganda concentrated highly on painting the movement as a white supremacist (type) organization would likely have great results. This effort should obviously slow down recruitment on non-whites as well as whites that find offense in such beliefs but additionally will give an embarrassing and negative connotation to an active This may lead to some drifting away from the organization, and will likely cause members to better safeguard their involvement (depreciated recruitment).
- Play up paranoia: Much of the movement’s doctrine is based on paranoid and fantastical beliefs of a false government(Turner). If presented in the proper light a great majority of sane minded people would likely find it laughable. Exposing and highly publicizing these areas in a massive informational campaign would likely have detrimental effects on the organization’s
- Paint them as evil: Focus on strong negative publicity highlighting acts of evil committed by the follower. This effort will create an anti-sovereign culture and ideally encourage tips from law abiding citizens.
Negative Consequences. A counter culture effort does not come without negative consequences. In an odd way, the endeavor will to an extent promote the organization. As some say even negative publicity is good publicity. The reality is that there will be certain fringe individuals that will be drawn to the group not despite but because of the radical elements. It is likely these individuals would find themselves in support of such activities regardless of the propaganda effort, but there is a risk of encouraging a few. Unfortunately, these same individuals are likely the most radicalized and likely to commit criminal activity due to their radical nature. That being said the positive aspects of the propaganda effort outweigh the few negative aspects and will likely yield excellent long-term results.
Policing the Sovereigns. One of the most frequent acts of violence by Sovereigns are acts against police. These often occur during routine matters that escalate to a shootout (League, 2010). This paper considers this type of event the most likely event to cause loss of life by members of the organization. Understanding this potential threat allows our civil servants the ability to take pre-emptive measures to mitigate against it. It is suggested that law enforcement and security officials (SO) adopt the following recommendations as appropriate:
- All law enforcement and security officials should receive initial and refresher training on the Sovereign Citizen organization. This training should specifically address how to identify a Sovereign and appropriately heightened security measures the officer should employ when dealing with the potential threat. Sovereign Citizen dialect and common tactics (fictitious license plates etc…) should be focused on for expedient identification by the officer(ACTIC, 2008).
- Traffic Stop Measures: This is a particularly vulnerable situation for the law enforcement officer (LEO), but steps can be taken to minimize vulnerability. In the event that the stopped individual is associated with Sovereign Citizens, security procedures must be amplified. It is recommended that single officers do not engage with the suspect. If need be waited for backup to arrive. It is further recommended that the suspect is treated as an armed and potentially dangerous suspect, and applicable procedures are applied. Additionally, the suspect should be informed that the measures were taken because they are part of a known terrorist organization.
- Security officials should take extra precautionary measures when dealing with known or suspected Sovereign Citizens much like the LEOs. Additionally, those working at points of entry should increase screening measures and dependent on location and venue possibly consider denying admission to members.
Negative Consequences. There are minimal consequences with these increased security procedures and education, but there are a few worthy of noting. The heightened procedures have the potential of escalating an otherwise routine event into an altercation. Nonetheless is proper measures are taken they should be resolved safely and swiftly by the LEO/SO. There is a potential for negative publicity by a videotaped or audio recorded incident going viral. This can, however, be utilized as an opportunity to educate the populace on the dangers of the movement and explain why such cautions are necessary.
Breaking the Bank
Hit them where it hurts. As previously discussed many aspects of the movement involve financial motives. These are often seen in the promotion of Sovereign education and through tax fraud (League, 2010). A concerted effort should be made by officials to stifle the profitability of these endeavors. This loss of profitability serves multiple gains.
- Loss of success stories for recruiting material
- Loss of ability to fund larger criminal activities
- Loss of membership supports by those financially motivated
The last point is a very encouraging one as it is suspected that many followers join for the potential financial rewards. This is seen in their use of paper terrorism to gain access to the (believed) secret bank trusts and other actions (Anti-Defamation League, 2010). Two suggested measures for posing financial difficulties on the organization are as follows:
- Consistently harass (legally) known Sovereign events and organizers. This harassment should come in the form of tax audits, regulatory and code violations etc… It is likely that through these routine strict enforcement measures that faults will be found. Those faults can then be utilized for expansion of authority in some cases (wire taps, etc…) or simple prosecution and fining in others. In either situation, it will serve the detriment of the Sovereign Movement.
- Strengthen the Internal Revenue Service’s ability to detect and prosecute tax fraud techniques perpetrated by the organization members. A working group should be convened to identify and correct process failures that are allowing individuals to successfully defraud the government. Each successful fraudulent return has great propaganda value to the organization and should be considered a top priority to stop. Without successes such as these, they will likely suffer a great loss of revenue, from both the obvious (tax fraud) and the marketing of ‘how to’ seminars and material on the topic.
Negative Consequences. There are no legitimate negative consequences associated with these measures. There is, of course, potential retaliation by the members and organization but that could be said of any endeavor to quell terrorism.
Defeating the harassment. Paper terrorism is a chosen method by members of the Sovereign Citizens to retaliate and disrupt society. This is conducted in various forms such as filing bogus liens, false claims, excessive legal documents and more (ACTIC, 2008). This disruptive practice disrupts the legitimate legal process and costs the government and taxpayers untold amounts of money and time. Fortunately, it is non-violent and can be nullified by the legislation of specific laws and regulation of certain processes.
- Create laws that specifically address the practice of paper terrorism and attach harsh penalties for violations of such laws.
- Thoroughly prosecute those found to violate the above laws.
- Publicize the prosecution and punishment of the above as a deterrent effort.
- Create processes in the legal system that limit the numbers of acceptable documents for submission, or at a minimum create a process to identify and penalize excessive documents submitted for the purpose of disruption.
Negative Consequences. There are only minimal negative consequences associated with the above effort. Those being the cost associated with legislation and process revamping.
As the report has detailed the Sovereign Citizen Movement is a growing and formidable enemy. Though they lack organization and sophisticated weaponry they are still very capable of causing large-scale violent acts. In many ways, their lack of structure and standard membership poses a greater challenge in forecasting potential attacks. While many of the movement’s adherents are non-violent they still pose a great menace to government systems and processes through various acts of paper terrorism, fraud, and harassment. It is clear that a combined intelligence collection approach is appropriate for this movement. As such OSINT, HUMINT and SIGINT have been identified as being the most effective methods for the task of collecting and analyzing intelligence on the Sovereign Citizen organization. The FBI has been identified as an obvious and preferred choice for the lead agency. If the suggested disciplines are correctly implemented and performed it is reasonable expected that these efforts will provide substantial intelligence for the use of countermeasures to mitigate the effectiveness of this terrorist movement. Finally, we reviewed reasonable solutions that will aid in the mitigation of potential future attacks by the organization’s members. These suggested techniques take a holistic approach that is suspected will not only mitigate potential attacks but eventually lead to the death of the terrorist group. The methods aim to harm the organization’s ability to recruit and gather funding. Additionally, it suggests education and legislation measures that will minimize the attacks.
ACTIC. (2008). Sovereign Citizens and Militia Information. ARIZONA Counter Terrorism Information Center.
Anti-Defamation League. (2010). Sovereign Citizen Movement. Retrieved from Extreme Terrorism: http://archive.adl.org/learn/ext_us/scm.html?xpicked=4.
Bjelopera, J. P. (2013). The Domestic Terrorist Threat: Congressional Research Service.
Bjelopera, J. P. (2014, August 15). CRS Insights. Retrieved from Federation of American Scientist: https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/terror/IN10137.pdf.
League, A.-D. (2010). The Lawless Ones:The Resurgence of the Sovereign Citizen Movement . Anti-Defamation League.
Liberty, J. (2004). The Global Sovereign’s Handbook. Institute for Communications Resources, Inc.
Sovereign Family Network. (n.d.). Sovereign Citizenship. Retrieved from Sovereign Authority: http://sovereign-citizenship.net/-l9NYCIhmYR90tlBZESbDEo-/home.html.
Turner, J. (n.d.). SOVEREIGN CITIZENS MOVEMENT. Retrieved from Southern Poverty Law Center: https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/extremist-files/ideology/sovereign-citizens-movement.