Can the DoJ go after Rittenhouse on a civil rights charge?

[Botany]

This seems so unfair.

[ShazamIam]

1. The families of his victims can go after him in civil court.

[kysrsoze]

11. This is what i hope - you only need a preponderance of evidence

Asshole went in, without being asked, carrying a firearm he wasn't legally allowed to own at his age during a protest. His behavior was extremely reckless and dangerous (and yes, I still think he's a murderer). I hope they take him for more than he'll ever earn.

[RegexReader]

12. a jury will not be sympathetic

to the families of a pedophile and a domestic abuser claiming of 'loss of affection'

[Elessar Zappa]

2. Not sure.

But it would be great if they could. Of course the jury might let the fucker off again.

[Hoyt]

3. Doubt it.

[onenote]

4. His victims were white

[Mr.Bill]

13. Doesn't matter when you are charging someone with

taking away their right to life.

[onenote]

14. It matters if you're claiming a federal "civil rights" violation, not a wrongful death tort.

The OP asked about DOJ bringing a civil rights action against Rittenhouse under federal law.

Every homicide doesn't give rise to a federal case.

[Mr.Bill]

15. And one of your civil rights is the right to life,

which is a right that white people have, too. The civil rights act does not bestow rights on people of color alone.

[onenote]

16. You are simply wrong.

Every homicide does not create a federal right of action. You must realize that. And to the extent murder can be prosecuted as a civil rights violation, it has to violate a specific civll rights act.

The relevant provision is 42 USC 242:. Deprivation of rights under color of law

Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or to different punishments, pains, or penalties, on account of such person being an alien, or by reason of his color, or race, than are prescribed for the punishment of citizens, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.

[Mr.Bill]

17. Kyle Rittenhouse was not acting under the color of law.

What you cited is not relevant at all.

I'm not going to sift through the entire civil rights act and find things to quote., but it is illegal to deprive any one of their right to life.

[onenote]

18. Exactly. Because he wasn't acting under color of law and didn't target victims based on race

he didn't commit a federal civil rights action and can't be prosecuted for murder under federal civil rights law.

You are making the right decision not to sift through the entire civil rights act, because you won't find what you're looking for. Section 242, which you have acknowledged wouldn't apply to Rittenhouse, is the one and only relevant statutory provision.

[LuvLoogie]

6. They won't.

[Sneederbunk]

8. No. Victims were not POC.

[onenote]

9. His victims were white

[MiniMe]

10. Seems like it would be double jeopardy.

Not a lawyer, and I could be completely wrong. It does seem unfair.

[Zeitghost]

19. No

He was not acting under color of law and he did not target those shot because of their race or ethnic background.