The Evolution of RICO: Mobsters, Gangsters, and Teachers?

In the past decade, the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Law has gained more popularity in media channels as it has been used to go after gang-related activity. RICO charges have been brought against a number of high profile rappers, including Young Thug and Fetty Wap. These rappers rose to national prominence through making music related to selling drugs, but now prosecutors are using RICO as a weapon against them.

The origins of RICO date back to the 1970s, when Congress passed the law in order to combat the spread of organized crime. However, the makeup of that organized crime is much different than the use of RICO today. The target of the law in the 70s was primarily mob-related organizations and families, such as the Gambino family. This law helped weaken the five families that controlled most of the mob-related activities in New York. A high level of arrests combined with plea deals for people who would testify in court led to a significant decrease in the mob families power. Due to the weakening of the mob, there was an available entrance into the illicit market of drugs, gambling, and racketeering. Biker gangs (such as Hells Angels), and street gangs (Bloods, Crips, Latin Kings) organized quickly to fill the void in the market.

This movement from mob families to gang enterprises explains the revitalization of RICO laws to combat illicit activity. The case of Young Thug, an Atlanta-based rapper affiliated with the gang YSL, is a particularly pertinent example of the current use of RICO against gangs.

In Young Thug’s preliminary RICO hearings, prosecutors cited a laundry list of offenses against YSL members including citing the rapper’s lyrics about murder as evidence. The popularity of Atlanta-based rap has skyrocketed over the past decade with artists such as Migos, Future, Gunna, and Young Thug racking up billions of streams. As Atlanta took the crown from New York as the new rap capital of the world, its artists gained mainstream relevance. With this newfound media and cultural relevance, these artists gained millions more listeners on Spotify. Fans enjoyed the music even if they could not relate to the subject matter. However, the Fulton County District Attorney, Fani Willis, saw the rise of YSL as a danger to Georgia. She used RICO charges for the 56 count case that includes Young Thug as well as other members of YSL such as Gunna.

But Willis did not stop at just street level gang activity. She has used RICO in an even more revolutionary way than the shift from mobs to gangs. 35 school teachers in Georgia were hit with RICO charges in a recent case. These teachers had participated in a scheme to falsify test scores of students when reporting to the state. One school even had the principal wear gloves and alter answer sheets after the students had turned them in. Still, observers questioned the application of RICO to schools as a criminal enterprise.

This use of RICO against a criminal “enterprise” surprised many people, as the usual connotation around RICO charges is that it is used exclusively for gangs and mobs. Nevertheless, cases like this and the case against R. Kelly demonstrate a colossal expansion in the scope of what RICO applies to. For example, R. Kelly was charged with RICO violations for creating a child sex trafficking ring. Despite him being the sole perpetrator, he was still charged as a member of a “criminal enterprise.” These examples show a pivot from gang-related activity to any criminal misconduct within an institution.

This new expansion of RICO does have important First Amendment implications if it continues to target traditionally non-criminal organizations. Under the First Amendment, people are entitled to freedom of association, but this expansion of RICO allows prosecutors to target groups operating with a social mission.

In Scheidler v. National Organization for Women, the Supreme Court allowed NOW to collect damages against an anti-abortion group that tried to shut down abortion clinics across the United States. While RICO was originally intended for rackets that primarily focused on extortion, the Court extended this power to organizations that had a social, rather than economic, incentive. This extension poses a lot of interesting future First Amendment questions surrounding RICO, such as whether membership to an advocacy organization would be applicable.

In a shocking move, Fani Willis may have pushed the boundaries of RICO even further. Experts predict that she could use RICO charges in the Donald Trump election fraud case. The enterprise in this case would be a coup against the United States and the criminal activity would be influencing witnesses and election fraud. This move by Willis illustrates the versatility of the RICO statute and her willingness to revolutionize the way it is used.

The past half century has seen the continual evolution of this law, with different groups becoming the main target of the statute. However, the current state of RICO is at an inflection point where prosecutors are seeing just how far they can push the envelope. The coming years and the Trump case will likely test the applicability of this law for public officials and other less enterprises.

Andreas Rivera Young is a Junior at Brown University, concentrating in Political Science and History. He is a staff writer for the Brown Undergraduate Law Review and can be contacted at andreas_rivera_young@brown.edu.