Paul Gancarz, Daniel Turetchi, Colton Brown, James Johnson, and Amelia Johnson, all members or affiliates of the white nationalist group Patriot Front, have filed what appears to be a classic federal SLAPP suit (Strategic Litigation Against Public Participation). The complaint, filed in the Western District of Washington, alleges violations of federal and state statutes, including the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA), invasion of privacy, and fraud. In reality, this lawsuit is a clear attempt to chill constitutionally protected political speech and punish those who expose organized hate.

The plaintiffs claim they were harmed by the public release of information linking them to Patriot Front, a group whose mission openly centers on promoting white nationalist ideology.  According to the plaintiffs own complaint, “Plaintiffs are members of, or have affiliation with, an organization called Patriot Front, whose mission is to “reforge . . . our people, born to this nation of our European race . . . as a new collective capable of asserting our right to cultural independence.” In accordance with this mission, members of Patriot Front sometimes engage in provocative activism.”

As the ADL notes “Since 2019, Patriot Front has been responsible for the vast majority of white supremacist propaganda distributed in the United States, using fliers, posters, stickers, banners and the internet to spread their hateful ideology.”

The complaint accuses our client of infiltrating the organization and disseminating information that allegedly resulted in the plaintiffs’ job losses and emotional distress. These claims rest on the misguided belief that membership in a very public white nationalist group is entitled to legal insulation from public scrutiny.

The First Amendment does not shield white supremacist organizing from exposure. It protects the right to engage in political speech, including the right to document, report on, and criticize groups whose conduct endangers the safety and civil rights of others. The plaintiffs’ attempt to recast public accountability as a tortious act is legally and morally indefensible. This federal lawsuit is no exception. Allegations of “emotional distress” cannot be used as a bludgeon to silence speech about a group whose own conduct invites public condemnation.

In response to this frivolous lawsuit, on June 27, 2025, the Civil Liberties Defense Center filed a motion to dismiss the complaint as well as a special motion for expedited relief under Washington’s Uniform Public Expression Protection Act (RCW § 4.105.020). Both filings make clear that the conduct at issue constitutes constitutionally protected expression on matters of substantial public concern.

We will not allow the judicial system to be weaponized against those who speak truth to power. The plaintiffs in this case are not victims of defamation or unlawful conduct. They are attempting to escape the consequences of their own association with a violent, racist movement.

CLDC will continue to support movement activists and community defenders. We stand ready to ensure that this meritless case is dismissed and that protected speech is not buried under the weight of bad-faith litigation.