How Derrick Van Orden’s threats hurt everyone in his district

A member of Congress targeting freedom of expression might not lead to criminal prosecutions or federal defunding today, but it creates a political environment that affects us in many ways.

(WARNING: This story makes reference to strong language that may be offensive.)

It’s one thing for a member of Congress to use social media to criticize, insult, belittle, even threaten. It’s another thing to carry out threats to cut federal funding targeting someone’s freedom of expression and introduce a bill equating free speech with domestic terrorism.

US Rep. Derrick Van Orden (R-Prairie du Chien) has been a constant presence on the social media platform X, formerly Twitter, with a stream of posts approaching 1,000 — most of them attacking people, organizations, even cities, because he did not like the way they reacted to the killing of conservative activist Charlie Kirk.

“F*** these bags of scum,” Van Orden has written. “You can shut the f*** up.” “He is a worthless piece of s***.” “F*** this terrorist.” 

Obscene insults, attacks on employment, threats to defund

But beyond the insults and obscenities, it is noteworthy that a sitting member of Congress has created an online parade of posts that celebrate the targeting or firing of people because of what they said about Kirk.

“I have no idea why this person still has a job.” “Deleting his job means something.” “This person has no business working for the United States government.”

There is also a steady stream of threats to cut federal funding based on remarks or postings from people who may only be loosely connected to an organization Van Orden vows to punish. 

“If any entity is receiving money from the federal government and continues to employ these people, they should not get a single nickel of federal funding,” reads a typical post.

Van Orden threatened funding for the Mayo Clinic Health System based on the post of one person who may or may not be a direct employee.

“We’re gonna work to remove all federal funding from the entire MAYO system until this is dealt with properly.”

Two members of the Eau Claire City Council, Aaron Brewster and Joshua Miller, have been targeted by Van Orden for what they posted online about Kirk — in a threat to kill all federal funding for the city of 71,000 people.

“This is My District,” Van Orden posted. “I’ve worked to get millions of dollars for the city of Eau Claire. We’re having a meeting today to figure out how to make that stop if this is not rectified immediately. Federal dollars will not be going to support communities that have hate mongers  celebrating the assassination of American citizens in their leadership.”

Van Orden wants to defund one of the largest communities in his district

What would that actually look like, if Van Orden had the power to stop sending the city any federal funds, including the taxes paid by Eau Claire residents and businesses?

City Manager Stephanie Hirsch told WQOW-TV the city receives nearly $12 million in federal funding used for public health, helping families afford housing and public transit.

Former city council member Kate Felton posted her concern about funds being cut for those items as well as road and bridge repair and equipment for the police department. 

There’s also nearly $2 million for a new facility designed to remove PFAS industrial chemicals from drinking water that Van Orden would want to pull back based on social media posts from two city council members. Van Orden equates all of these comments to criminal activity.

If Van Orden truly means all federal financial assistance, it could include a lot of items that seem small until someone needs them, such as tax breaks for repairing or saving a building on the National Register of Historic Places. The owner of the landmark Drummond House, for example, might qualify for a 20% tax credit for repairs needed after a fire last week caused extensive damage to the 1888 home and displaced 15 residents.

Going beyond individual tweets, Van Orden wants to make it a law for Congress to withhold federal funding “to any entity that employs individuals who condone and celebrate political violence and domestic terrorism (as that term is defined in section 2331 of title 18, United States Code),” according to the text of the bill. 

But who decides whether someone has “condoned” political violence? Van Orden won’t say.

Van Orden equates Kirk comments with domestic terrorism

“We will not stop until any institution that employs people who advocate for these crimes are held accountable,” Van Orden posted about his bill. He would later tell WEAU-TV in a contentious interview that comments about Kirk qualify as domestic terrorism.

“If you are espousing for political violence and terrorism, you can be arrested because, I’m telling you, black and white in the law. It’s unlawful,” Van Orden said in a contentious interview, as reporters noted the lack of any threatening language in many of the posts.

“If you look up the US code and read it, it is crystal clear that what they are saying falls under this US statute,” Van Orden said condescendingly. “So it’s a little frustrating when I have clearly intelligent people like yourself who can read that you don’t do your homework before you conduct this interview.”

In other words, Van Orden could not give evidence of how non-threatening comments fall under Title 18, Chapter 113B, which defines terrorism as it relates to nuclear weapons, missile systems, radiological dispersal devices, and providing material support.

It does not include social media posts.