Springfield sues ‘Blood Tribe' members after summer of harassment, threats
The lawsuit claims the group's actions were fueled by 'ethnic and racial hatred,' specifically against Springfield's Haitian community.
Springfield files federal lawsuit against alleged Neo-Nazi group for campaign of 'threats and intimidation'
That population was first brought into the national spotlight during last year's presidential campaign, with unfounded claims against legal Haitian migrants leading to days of unrest and several bomb threats.
Attorneys for the city of Springfield filed a lawsuit against self-proclaimed Blood Tribe Founder Christopher Pohlhaus, the local leader Drake Berentz and seven other Blood Tribe members, listed as 'John Does.'
The suit describes the group as a 'white supremacist organization,' accused of more than 30 bomb threats and other forms of harassment during the summer of 2024.
According to the Anti-Defamation League, the Blood Tribe is a growing Neo-Nazi group that claims to have chapters across the country. The group does not allow women to be members.
The Blood Tribe first held a public demonstration in Ohio when they protested a drag queen store hour in Wadsworth.
The 58-page lawsuit was filed in federal court in Dayton. It outlines several claims of harassment and intimidation by Blood Tribe leaders and members.
Now, Springfield is seeking damages.
Swastika-waving group chased off of I-75 by neighborhood
According to court documents, Blood Tribe members allegedly showed up in downtown Springfield during the Jazz and Blues Festival last August, waving swastika flags, pointing guns at attendees and shouting racial slurs.
This came after the founder of the group allegedly encouraged Blood Tribe members on social media to 'hit Springfield' due to the rapidly growing Haitian community in the city.
Later that month, the local Blood Tribe leader addressed the city at a commission meeting. One resident spoke out.
'He is a literal Nazi, he marched with swastikas,' the resident said during the meeting. 'Do not give him a platform.'
The leader allegedly threatened officials at the meeting and called for the city to stop letting immigrants in. Springfield Mayor Rob Rue asked police to escort the man from the building.
'In our guidelines, the moment you begin to sound threatening, that's when we say that's enough,' said Rue. 'That's not free speech, that's a threat.'
'You sound threatening to me,' said Rue during the meeting. 'If I could just ask the police to go ahead — you just sound threatening, if you could just go ahead and just peacefully be removed.'
The lawsuit claims that following this particular meeting, the Blood Tribe harassed supporters of the Haitian community, along with Rue. The suit accuses Blood Tribe members of sending suspicious packages resembling bombs to some plaintiffs.
The defendants are also accused of sharing personal information, sending hate-filled emails and voicemails and using dating apps to send men to the homes of Haitian community supporters late at night under false pretenses.
Rue shared a statement regarding the suit:
The city of Springfield will not stand idly by while hate groups like the Blood Tribe attempt to terrorize our residents and violate their civil rights. This lawsuit sends a clear message that hate, intimidation and violence have no place in our community.'
Rob Rue, Springfield mayor
Read the full lawsuit below:
SPRINGFIELD-V-BLOOD-TRIBEDownload
The lawsuit is demanding a jury trial on nine counts, including conspiracy to violate civil rights, menacing, inciting violence and ethnic intimidation. The city of Springfield has until May 7 to officially serve the Blood Tribe.
2 NEWS reached out to both sides of this lawsuit for a statement. We are waiting to hear back.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
6 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Green Card Applicants Face New Vetting Procedures: What to Know
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. On Tuesday the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) issued a major update on assessment of immigrant benefit applications, including those for Green Cards, which will now encompass "anti-Americanism" expressed on social media. Newsweek contacted the USCIS, part of the Department of Homeland Security, for comment on Thursday via email outside of regular office hours. Why It Matters Since coming to power, the Trump administration has tightened restrictions on travel to the United States, including requiring prospective international students to provide details about their social media accounts which will be checked for "any indication of hostility" toward American "citizens, culture, government, institutions or founding principles." As of April 14, data from Inside Higher Ed showed more than1,000 international students had their visas revoked due to alleged involvement in political activism, including relating to the ongoing war in Gaza. The Trump administration accused some of these students of holding antisemitic or "pro-terrorist" views, which they have widely denied. What To Know The USCIS updated its Policy Manual on Tuesday, with immediate effect, instructing its employees to take account of any "anti-American activity" when deciding whether to approve immigration applications including for permanent resident cards, commonly known as green cards. According to a press release any "anti-American activity will be an overwhelmingly negative factor in any discretionary analysis" of applications. It is unclear exactly what would constitute "anti-American activity," though CBS News reports it will be based around an existing immigration law blocking citizenship from advocates of communism, totalitarianism or the overthrow of the American government. The updated USCIS Policy Manual says its officers should factor in "whether the alien has endorsed, promoted, supported, or otherwise espoused anti-American views or the views of a terrorist organization or group" when making decisions on benefits such as green cards. This process has been expanded to include vetting of social media accounts. A U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) sign is displayed at the Border Field State Park with the US-Mexico border wall in the background on August 17, 2025 in Imperial Beach, California. A U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) sign is displayed at the Border Field State Park with the US-Mexico border wall in the background on August 17, 2025 in Imperial Beach, California. Kevin Carter/GETTY The policy change impacts those immigration benefits classed as discretionary, which includes work permits and student visas as well as green cards. When considering discretionary immigration benefits the USCIS already had compliance with immigration law as a factor, and this will continue. Earlier this month the USCIS said it would expand vetting for migrants seeking American citizenship to focus on assuring they have a "good moral character." Previously this had largely been dependent on the absence of criminal offenses or immigration law violations, but this will now include the applicants "adherence to societal norms" and "positive contributions" to wider society. What People Are Saying USCIS spokesman Matthew Tragesser said: "America's benefits should not be given to those who despise the country and promote anti-American ideologies. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services is committed to implementing policies and procedures that root out anti-Americanism and supporting the enforcement of rigorous screening and vetting measures to the fullest extent possible. "Immigration benefits—including to live and work in the United States—remain a privilege, not a right." What Happens Next? The changes outlined by the USCIS went into effect immediately and apply to "requests pending or filed on or after the publication date."
USA Today
34 minutes ago
- USA Today
Two students found each other in online hate communities. Both became school shooters
The Anti-Defamation League investigation charts how two school shooters followed similar arcs. They joined online extremist chats and months later carried out attacks of their own. He was a 17-year-old student in Nashville. She was 15 and living in Wisconsin. They joined the same chatroom, followed each other online and months later found themselves together in a growing club — U.S. school shooters. Investigators at the Anti-Defamation League found striking similarities between the two young killers and the paths they took that shattered families and communities, according to an Aug. 21 study provided to USA TODAY. The path they took included watching videos of graphic violence, following white supremacists online and celebrating other shooters, investigators found. Solomon Henderson, 17, wound up killing a student and injuring another in January at Antioch High School in Tennessee. Natalie Rupnow, 15, wound up killing two students and injuring six in December at Abundant Life Christian School in Madison, Wisconsin. Both committed suicide after the attacks. The ADL says the report "Two Teens. Two School Shootings. One Digital Descent" shows the deadly influence of online extremist communities. "Kids and teens today have lived their entire lives with easy internet access, putting them even more at risk of encountering violent extremism online," said ADL CEO Jonathan Greenblatt. "Extremist ideas combined with gore websites can inspire users to seek out more extremist content, while violence on extremist platforms can inspire others to look for even more violent content. It's a vicious cycle, especially for young people." He said the aim of the research is to help prevent future attacks. ADL investigators found the students became shooters between 18 and 19 months after joining the graphic violence chatroom WatchPeopleDie. The two also followed each other online. Rupnow followed Henderson on December 3, weeks before the December 16 shooting in Wisconsin, researchers found. Henderson reciprocated by calling her "saintress" in his online diary and creating a TikTok celebrating her attack seven days before his own strike on January 22. One of Rupnow's online friends was arrested in April in Florida for threatening to carry out a mass shooting, according to reporting by The Palm Beach Post, part of the USA TODAY Network. The ADL research comes out just as students around the nation are heading back to school. There were several school shooter incidents over the course of the 2024 to 2025 academic year, according to the K-12 School Shooting Database. Among them were the attacks in Tennessee, Wisconsin and an attack at Apalachee High School in Georgia that left four dead. The number of shootings was up from six during the previous academic year, according to the database. Timeline of two school shooters The pair of shooters joined WatchPeopleDie just nine days apart from each other. A little over a month separated the timing of their attacks a year and a half later, ADL researchers found. According to the research: The 17-year-old carried out the shooting just 19 months after joining the online chatroom to watch extreme graphic violence. The 15-year-old girl carried out her attack 18 months after joining the group. What happened after the shootings? The shootings themselves weren't the final chapter, as legal consequences continue to emerge. The parents of Josselin Corea Escalante, a 16-year-old student killed in the Antioch attack, are suing Metro Nashville Public Schools over the shooting, according to reporting by The Tennessean, part of the USA TODAY Network. Family members argued that Metro Nashville Public Schools should have known the shooter, a fellow student, posed a danger to students and should have taken steps to prevent violence. They also argue the school district was negligent in operating its school security system because it failed to detect the shooter's firearm. Jeffrey Rupnow is facing charges over his daughter's use of his firearm. But he filed a motion on Aug. 18 asking the judge to dismiss the charges, according to reporting by the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, part of the USA TODAY Network. The elder Rupnow argues that he didn't allow his daughter to access the safe where he kept the gun. He told her that the code was his Social Security number in reverse but argued he never gave her the numbers or any other clues. Allen faces potentially 21 years in prison on charges of threatening a mass shooting, unlawful use of a police badge and unlawful use of a cellphone, The Palm Beach Post reported. An online community of extremists ADL investigators found the pair of American students were not just familiar with each other, but were also in close contact with other people who celebrated shootings, were interested in carrying them out and even people who attempted attacks. In addition to Allen in Florida, Rupnow joined an online community to watch a white supremacist livestream an attack outside a mosque in Turkey. The 18-year-old attacker was armed with a hatchet and two knives and injured five people before he was arrested. Afterwards, Rupnow sent messages celebrating the attack even though no one died, according to the ADL. The attack in Turkey played a direct role in inspiring Rupnow's attack in Wisconsin, the ADL said she stated in some of her writings. Rupnow was the closest encounter with another shooter that Henderson had, according to the ADL. He learned that she had followed him on X and began admiring her, referring to her in his online diary as a "saintress." The term is a twist on the way incels refer to violent members of their community as saints, the ADL said. The ADL said that the pair went down the path of murder because of the online communities they participated in that glorified and encouraged violence. Henderson, who was Black, and Rupnow, who was a girl, also show that extremist ideology can reach people regardless of race or gender, the ADL said. ADL leaders hope the investigation's findings will prompt parents and school leaders to reconsider what type of online access students have. The anti-hate organization is sharing the timeline of how the two students became shooters with 16,000 school superintendents, according to a news release. "Extremism, hate, and violent gore are just a click away for many children — making it urgent for schools and parents to implement safeguards," said Oren Segal, the ADL's senior vice president of Counter-Extremism and Intelligence. "These toxic online spaces can cause devastating harm in our communities and are increasingly becoming central to the broader violent extremist landscape." Contributing by USA TODAY Network reporters Laura Schulte of the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, Evan Mealins of The Tennessean and Hannah Phillips of The Palm Beach Post.
Newsweek
2 hours ago
- Newsweek
How Green Card Holders Can Best Show 'Good Moral Character'
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Green card holders applying for U.S. citizenship are required to demonstrate good moral character (GMC), a key eligibility criterion under U.S. immigration law. Recent updates from U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) have expanded the factors officials consider when evaluating applicants, emphasizing both past conduct and positive contributions to society. Newsweek spoke to two immigration experts about what it means to have "good moral character." Why It Matters On August 15, USCIS issued a memorandum directing officers to adopt a "totality of circumstances" approach in assessing GMC. Officials are instructed to review not only criminal history but also attributes such as community involvement, family responsibilities, educational achievements, employment history, length of lawful residence, and compliance with tax obligations. A few days later, on August 19, USCIS updated its guidance to include the evaluation of whether applicants have endorsed, promoted, or supported views of terrorist organizations or groups promoting anti-American ideologies. The guidance does not define "anti-American" in detail, which may result in subjective interpretation in individual cases. Photo-illustration by Newsweek/Getty What To Know "This is a game-changer because applicants are now subject to what appears to be a more discretionary test, and applicants lack guidance or certainty as to what constitutes the positive attributes and contributions," Vincent W. Lau, managing partner at immigration firm Clark Lau, told Newsweek. "Among other eligibility factors, aliens applying for naturalization must demonstrate that he or she has been and continues to be an individual of good moral character (GMC)." USCIS policy reads. Immigration experts advised applicants to take a comprehensive and proactive approach to demonstrating GMC. "In the past, the main focus has been on whether applicants had criminal records, particularly in the five years prior to filing a naturalization application. But USCIS is now expecting more of an affirmative case that an applicant has good character, versus simply having an absence of a negative history with law enforcement," Greg Siskind, founding partner at Siskind Susser Immigration Firm, told Newsweek. Siskind emphasized three areas of focus: reviewing immigration history for inconsistencies or errors, explaining non-criminal issues such as unpaid child support or prior tax problems with evidence of resolution, and highlighting positive contributions to family and community through documentation such as affidavits or personal statements. "Even if a charge didn't result in jail or even a conviction, if the court records show that immoral conduct took place – even if it didn't result in a conviction – it could still be a problem at a naturalization interview," Siskind said. Since January, the Trump administration has been revising immigration policy, implementing stricter rules across multiple legal immigration channels and leveraging USCIS, a benefits-focused agency, to curb migration. Experts have raised concerns about how USCIS will evaluate applicants' loyalty, regarding the policy on "anti-American" views. "What does it mean to be anti-American? There are questions on the naturalization application asking whether one would take the oath of allegiance, whether one would bear arms on behalf of the U.S., whether one would perform work of national importance, and whether one would perform noncombatant services," Lau said. "Are affirmative answers to these questions sufficiently 'American? This is also as vague and ambiguous as the 'societal norms' question," he added. Green card holders, who are eligible to apply for U.S. citizenship, may find these new policies affecting their naturalization process. The expanded evaluation criteria mean that applicants will need to provide comprehensive documentation demonstrating the new changes. What People Are Saying Vincent W. Lau, managing partner at Clark Lau, told Newsweek: "The pitfall now would be to file an application with no evidence at all. It is too soon to know whether USCIS will be providing any further guidance. Short of further guidance, applicants are going to find themselves in a guessing game. The bar has been raised. Having GMC is not just about not doing "wrong," but one must also do "right." And, how much "right?" Greg Siskind, founding partner at Siskind Susser, told Newsweek: "Applicants should also now be proactive in demonstrating they are good members of the community. Showing a person is a good family member and volunteers in the community can help, and a person can get affidavits or personal statements to help document this." USCIS spokesman Matthew Tragesser, in a press release: "America's benefits should not be given to those who despise the country and promote anti-American ideologies. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services is committed to implementing policies and procedures that root out anti-Americanism and supporting the enforcement of rigorous screening and vetting measures to the fullest extent possible." What Happens Next As these policies are relatively new, applicants are advised to prepare thorough documentation and remain up to date with the latest information.
