Skip to main content

What is the Sovereign Citizen Movement, what do they believe and how are they spreading?

Guides

Sovereign citizen movementOn May 20th, 2010, two Arkansas police officers, Brandon Paudert and Bill Evans, stopped a white minivan with irregular license plates.[1] The driver, Jerry Kane, spoke with the officers outside the vehicle, while Joseph Kane, Jerry’s 16-year-old son, silently retrieved an AK-47 rifle from within the van. Joseph appeared from the vehicle shooting and killing both officers. The Kanes’ fled the scene, but police located them nearby. The ensuing shootout led to the injury of two more officers and the deaths of Jerry and Joseph.[2]

The resulting police investigation uncovered the Kanes’ deep connection to an anti-government ideology known as the Sovereign Citizen Movement.[3] The American Federal Bureau of Investigation defines Sovereign Citizens as, “anti-government extremists who believe that even though they physically reside in [the] country, they are separate or ‘sovereign’ from the United States.”[4]

While most Americans are unaware of the Sovereign Citizen Movement, surveys of American law enforcement have ranked Sovereign Citizens as the most significant threat to the United States.[5] Furthermore, according to J. J. MacNab, a journalist covering the American Far Right, from 2000 through 2016, Sovereign Citizens were responsible for the deaths of 18 law enforcement officers and nine civilians, and for the injury of 17 law enforcement officers and nine civilians.[6]

 

What do sovereign citizens believe?

Sovereign ideology is complex and difficult to follow, but a few scholars have succinctly described their beliefs in prior publications. For more information on the ideological beliefs and historical foundation of the Sovereign Citizen Movement, I highly recommend the work of Berger (2016) and Loeser (2015), listed below. Further, Levitas (2002) offers a unique historical discussion of the Sovereign Citizen Movement. These three works give an essential overview of the organisation’s history and ideology. In a nutshell, their beliefs, while not universal, coalesce around three basic ideas.[7]

The first is the assertion that the United States government holds no authority over a ‘Sovereign Citizen’.[8] From a warped interpretation of various legal frameworks, Sovereigns assert a legal precedent that they are not required to follow laws, pay taxes, or respond to official documentation.[9]

The second Sovereign belief is that only a precise form of governance or law enforcement is legal. [10] For example, in the United States, many assert county sheriffs are the only legitimate form of governance and require their presence during interactions with law enforcement and court systems.

Lastly, Sovereigns assert that their identity is two-fold. The first is a government, corporate, or ‘strawman’ identity.[11] This identity represents their existence through birth certificates, drivers’ licenses, and other official documentation. Sovereigns request that this ‘legal’ name be written in capital letters as a signifier of this identity.[12] Sovereigns in other countries use a similar perspective, referring to the government as a corporation.

Upon arrest, Sovereigns often assert that they do not have an obligation to represent their corporate identity, which is responsible for the individual’s debts and legal obligations. Some Sovereigns even believe their corporate identity represents the value given to each person by the United States Government as collateral on foreign debt since gold or silver bullion do not back the United States' Dollar. Sovereigns believe they can redeem this value by filing various tax and legal documents with the United States Internal Revenue Service.[13]

The second identity represents their personal identity, one that is connected to the natural law which exists outside the bounds of any legal, financial, or governmental obligation.

 

Sovereign citizen tactics

The tactics of Sovereign Citizens are as varied as their ideology. A core tactic is known as ‘paper terrorism’: the refusal to pay taxes, the forging of documentation, the filing of fake taxes, or overwhelming courts and commercial organisations with incredible amounts of paperwork.[14] Often, they use these tactics to retaliate against public officials who act in their official capacity.[15] In most instances, their victims report the actions as a nuisance, time-consuming and monetarily expensive rather than violent.

However, in recent years, the violence of Sovereign Citizens is becoming more prominent. In response, United States government agencies have enacted strict protocols for interactions between employees and Sovereigns.[16] However, while some other far-right groups target people based on ideological principle, the United States Department of Homeland Security believes Sovereigns engage in violence without an ideological component. They believe Sovereign violence manifests due to personal circumstances against their victims.[17]

 

Internationalisation of the Sovereign Movement

In recent years, Sovereigns are beginning to appear on the international stage. In my research, I linked Sovereign Citizen websites in the United States with Sovereign-like sites in Canada (the Freemen on the Land and Human Rights Defenders Canada), Ireland (Freeman Ireland – Inactive), the United Kingdom (The English Rag, Lawful Rebellion, and Project Freeman), and Australia (Truth-Now). While these websites may not have associated offline components, large billboards have appeared across the United Kingdom with references to “legal name fraud” – the Sovereign idea that in the UK a birth certificate issued by the ‘Crown’ is not a legal document because you did not consent to its creation.[18] The arguments on these billboards resemble those of the American Sovereign Citizen Movement, referring to multiple forms of citizenship and government control.

In most situations, Sovereign ideas regarding government authority, citizenship, and a variety of anti-government and other conspiracy theories are transferring globally. Most websites reference their home countries government as having no power over them because of a specific violation of the state’s constitution or governing documents. Often, they assert that because of this violation, these documents no longer apply, and thus older texts such as the Magna Carta or the United States Articles of Confederation are the state’s governing body, with all other structures operating illegally. While the “Legal Name Fraud” billboards represent a non-intrusive presence, they do imply a building presence of the Sovereign movement worldwide. In the United States, the Sovereign Movement expanded rapidly following the housing collapse in 2008. People sought help for their financial problems, adopting a variety of tactics and beliefs from the Sovereign Movement. Similar financial or economic collapses in other states could result in similar explosions in the population of these groups.

 

Internationalisation of violence

In terrorism scholarship, researchers warn about the malevolent creativity of terrorism and the diffusion of tactics between organisations.[19] Sovereigns have expanded from purely a nuisance to a significant threat in the United States. Law enforcement, government officials, and others with direct access to the public in their official capacities should be wary of individuals who use flawed legal theories, defunct legal codes and apply principles from centuries-old legal documents to modern phenomena.

Sovereigns can create problems not just for government agencies, but for their employees through fraudulent court filings, lawsuits, and retaliatory practices. While the movement may not present as significant a presence in countries outside of the United States, if terrorism literature can add anything to the potential ramifications of Sovereigns becoming international, we are likely to see violence diffuse with paper terrorism tactics. In recent years, states have experienced violence associated with their Sovereign-like movements. In Canada, violence stems from the Freeman on the Land Movement.[20] Moreover, in Germany, the Reichsbürger Movement has engaged in violence against Law Enforcement.[21] These incidents should serve as a warning for states just experiencing Sovereign nuisance activities because they could result in the introduction of violence.

 

Read More:

Berger, J. M. (2016). Without Prejudice: What Sovereign Citizens Believe. Washington, D.C. Retrieved from: https://cchs.gwu.edu/sites/cchs.gwu.edu/files/downloads/Occasional%20Paper_Berger.pdf

Fleishman, D. (2004). Paper Terrorism: The Impact of the "Sovereign Citizen" on Local Government. The Public Law Journal, 27(2). Retrieved from: http://calawyers.org/Sections/Public-Law/Publications/Journal.

Levitas, D. (2002). The Terrorist Next Door: The Militia Movement and the Radical Right. New York City, New York: Thomas Dunne Books, St. Martin's Press.

Loeser, C. E. (2015). From Paper Terrorists to Cop Killers: The Sovereign Citizen Threat. North Carolina Law Review, 93(1106), 1106-1139. Retrieved from: http://scholarship.law.unc.edu/nclr/vol93/iss4/4

Southern Poverty Law Center. (2011, May 15). Violent and Dangerous: America's Sovereign Citizens Movement. Retrieved from http://www.opposingviews.com/i/inside-america-s-sovereign-citizens-movement on October 28, 2016

 

References

Anti-Defamation League. "The Lawless Ones: The Resurgence of the Sovereign Citizen Movement." 2012.

Berger, J.M. "Without Prejudice: What Sovereign Citizens Believe." Washington, D.C.: Program on Extremism at George Washington University, 2016.

Bjelopera, Jerome P. "The Domestic Terrorist Threat: Background and Issues for Congress." edited by Congressional Research Service. Washington, D.C., 2014.

Bleiker, Carla. "Sovereign Citizen Movmeent - the Us 'Reichsbürger'." The DW, http://p.dw.com/p/2RUCm.

Department of Homeland Security. "Sovereign Citizen Extremist Ideology Will Drive Violence at Home, During Travel, and at Government Facilities." Office of INtelligence and ANalysis, 2015.

Federal Bureau of Investigation. "Domestic Terrorism: The Sovereign Citizen Movement." Washington, D.C., 2010.

———. "Sovereign Citizens: An Introduction for Law Enforcement." Washington, D.C., 2010.

Fleishman, David. "Paper Terrorism: The Impact of the "Sovereign Citizen" on Local Government." The Public Law Journal 27, no. 2 (2004).

Freilich, Joshua D., Steven M. Chermak, and Joseph Simone. "Surveying American State Police Agencies About Terrorism Threats, Terrorism Sources, and Terrorism Definitions." Terrorism and Political Violence 21, no. 3 (2010): 450-75.

Gill, Paul, John Horgan, Samuel T. Hunter, and Lily D. Cushenbery. "Malevolent Creativity in Terrorist Organizations." The Journal of Creative Behavior 47, no. 2 (2013): 125-51.

Harris, Dan. "Deadly Arkansas Shooting by ‘Sovereigns’ Jerry and Joe Kane Who Shun U.S. Law." ABC News, http://abcnews.go.com/WN/deadly-arkansas-shooting-sovereign-citizens-jerry-kane-joseph/story?id=11065285.

Hofmann, David, Barbara Perry, and Ryan Scrivens. "Broadening Our Understanding of Anti-Authority Movements in Canada." Canada: Canadian Networks for Research on Terrorism, Security and Society, 2017.

Horowitz, Michael C. "Nonstate Actors and the Diffusion of Innovations: The Case of Suicide Terrorism." International Organization 64, no. 01 (2010): 33.

Kelly, Jon. "The Mystery of the ‘Legal Name Fraud’ Billboards." BBC News Magazine, http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-36499750.

Levitas, Daniel. The Terrorist Next Door: The Militia Movement and the Radical Right. New York City, New York: Thomas Dunne Books, St. Martin's Press, 2002.

Loeser, Charles E. "From Paper Terrorists to Cop Killers: The Sovereign Citizen Threat." North Carolina Law Review 93, no. 1106 (2015): 1106-39.

MacNab, J. J. "Anti-Government Extremist Violence and Plots." http://www.seditionists.com/antigovviolence.pdf.

———. "'Sovereign' Citizen Kane." Southern Poverty Law Center, https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/intelligence-report/2010/sovereign-citizen-kane.

"Sovereign Citizens Movement." In Southern Poverty Law Center, 2015.

Strang, David, and Sarah A. Soule. "Diffusion in Organizations and Social Movements: From Hybrid Corn to Poison Pills." Annual Review of Sociology 24, no. 265-290 (1998).

Sullivan, Francis X. ""The Usurping Octopus of Jurisdictional Authority": The Legal Theories of the Sovereign Citizen Movement." Wisconsin Law Review (1999).

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. "Attention Hud Reo Contractors, Property Inspectors, Section 8 Administrators, and Realtors: Watch Out: Sovereign Citizen Scams." 7. Washington, D.C.: Office of the Inspector General, 2015.

U.S. Department of Justice, and Federal Bureau of Investigation. "Sovereign Citizen Use of Documents to Further Fraudulent Schemes: Reference Guide." Washington, D.C., 2012.

Wang, Dan J., and Sarah A. Soule. "Social Movement Organizational Collaboration: Networks of Learning and the Diffusion of Protest Tactics, 1960-1995." American Journal of Sociology 117, no. 6 (2012): 1674-722.


[1] J. J. MacNab, "'Sovereign' Citizen Kane," Southern Poverty Law Center, https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/intelligence-report/2010/sovereign-citizen-kane.

[2] Dan Harris, "Deadly Arkansas Shooting by ‘Sovereigns’ Jerry and Joe Kane Who Shun U.S. Law," ABC News, http://abcnews.go.com/WN/deadly-arkansas-shooting-sovereign-citizens-jerry-kane-joseph/story?id=11065285.

[3] MacNab, "'Sovereign' Citizen Kane".

[4] Jerome P. Bjelopera, "The Domestic Terrorist Threat: Background and Issues for Congress," ed. Congressional Research Service (Washington, D.C.2014), 26.

[5] Joshua D. Freilich, Steven M. Chermak, and Joseph Simone, "Surveying American State Police Agencies About Terrorism Threats, Terrorism Sources, and Terrorism Definitions," Terrorism and Political Violence 21, no. 3 (2010).

[6] J. J. MacNab, "Anti-Government Extremist Violence and Plots," http://www.seditionists.com/antigovviolence.pdf.

[7] J.M. Berger, "Without Prejudice: What Sovereign Citizens Believe," (Washington, D.C.: Program on Extremism at George Washington University, 2016).

[8] Anti-Defamation League, "The Lawless Ones: The Resurgence of the Sovereign Citizen Movement," (2012); Berger, "Without Prejudice: What Sovereign Citizens Believe."; Federal Bureau of Investigation, "Domestic Terrorism: The Sovereign Citizen Movement," (Washington, D.C.2010); "Sovereign Citizens: An Introduction for Law Enforcement," (Washington, D.C.2010).

[9] Berger, "Without Prejudice: What Sovereign Citizens Believe."

[10] Ibid.

[11] Charles E. Loeser, "From Paper Terrorists to Cop Killers: The Sovereign Citizen Threat," North Carolina Law Review 93, no. 1106 (2015).

[12] Berger, "Without Prejudice: What Sovereign Citizens Believe."

[13] Ibid.; Loeser, "From Paper Terrorists to Cop Killers: The Sovereign Citizen Threat."; Francis X Sullivan, ""The Usurping Octopus of Jurisdictional Authority": The Legal Theories of the Sovereign Citizen Movement," Wisconsin Law Review (1999); U.S. Department of Justice and Federal Bureau of Investigation, "Sovereign Citizen Use of Documents to Further Fraudulent Schemes: Reference Guide," (Washington, D.C.2012).

[14] David Fleishman, "Paper Terrorism: The Impact of the "Sovereign Citizen" on Local Government," The Public Law Journal 27, no. 2 (2004).

[15] Department of Homeland Security, "Sovereign Citizen Extremist Ideology Will Drive Violence at Home, During Travel, and at Government Facilities," (Office of INtelligence and ANalysis, 2015).

[16] U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, "Attention Hud Reo Contractors, Property Inspectors, Section 8 Administrators, and Realtors: Watch Out: Sovereign Citizen Scams," (Washington, D.C.: Office of the Inspector General, 2015); Department of Homeland Security, "Sovereign Citizen Extremist Ideology Will Drive Violence at Home, During Travel, and at Government Facilities."

[17] "Sovereign Citizen Extremist Ideology Will Drive Violence at Home, During Travel, and at Government Facilities."

[18] Jon Kelly, "The Mystery of the ‘Legal Name Fraud’ Billboards," BBC News Magazine, http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-36499750.

[19]Paul Gill et al., "Malevolent Creativity in Terrorist Organizations," The Journal of Creative Behavior 47, no. 2 (2013). Michael C. Horowitz, "Nonstate Actors and the Diffusion of Innovations: The Case of Suicide Terrorism," International Organization 64, no. 01 (2010); David Strang and Sarah A. Soule, "Diffusion in Organizations and Social Movements: From Hybrid Corn to Poison Pills," Annual Review of Sociology 24, no. 265-290 (1998); Dan J. Wang and Sarah A. Soule, "Social Movement Organizational Collaboration: Networks of Learning and the Diffusion of Protest Tactics, 1960-1995," American Journal of Sociology 117, no. 6 (2012).

[20] David Hofmann, Barbara Perry, and Ryan Scrivens, "Broadening Our Understanding of Anti-Authority Movements in Canada," (Canada: Canadian Networks for Research on Terrorism, Security and Society, 2017).

[21] Carla Bleiker, "Sovereign Citizen Movmeent - the Us 'Reichsbürger'," The DW, http://p.dw.com/p/2RUCm.


Matthew M. Sweeney is a Doctoral Candidate at the Center for Terrorism and Security Studies and in the School of Criminology and Justice Studies at the University of Massachusetts Lowell. His research focuses on political violence, the American Far Right, and Policing. Matt's dissertation addresses how the centralisation of a social movement organisation impacts the organisation's tactical choice, ideological cohesion, and methods of mobilisation.


You might also like: