Cooley Law School professors speak out against growing enthusiasm for vigilantism
In recent days, two high-profile cases have cast a troubling light on the growing enthusiasm for vigilantism in America. From the tragic chokehold death of Jordan Neely to the violent shooting of United Health Care CEO Brian Thompson, these events raise critical questions about the legitimacy of individuals taking the law into their own hands.
While emotions surrounding these incidents are raw, the fundamental issue at stake is clear: vigilantism undermines the rule of law, erodes trust in our justice system, and ultimately threatens the safety and stability of our society.
We have not seen such enthusiasm for vigilante justice since the infamous case of Bernhard Goetz, the New York City man who shot four youths on a subway train in 1984, claiming he was acting in self-defense against an attempted robbery. Although a jury acquitted Goetz of the most serious charges, the case sparked a national debate over whether individuals should be allowed to take justice into their own hands. That debate remains unresolved, but recent events suggest that we may be slipping back into dangerous territory. In the case of Daniel Penny, who was acquitted of manslaughter in the chokehold death of Jordan Neely, the issue of self-defense and proportionality was at the center of the debate. Neely, a mentally ill homeless man, was tragically killed on a subway, with the incident captured on video by fellow passengers. While some argue that Penny acted to protect himself and others, this case, like Goetz’s, raises uncomfortable questions about when it is appropriate to intervene in potentially dangerous situations.
Similarly, the recent killing of United Health Care CEO Brian Thompson on the streets of New York has ignited heated discussions about corporate greed, healthcare inequities, and the perceived injustices of health insurance companies. Some individuals, particularly on social media, have hailed Thompson’s alleged killer, Luigi Mangione, as a hero—viewing his actions as a form of retribution against a system they believe to be inherently corrupt.
As law professors at Cooley Law School, we must emphasize the vital importance of the rule of law. While it is natural to feel anger or frustration over injustices—whether individual or systemic—it is essential that we do not allow our emotions to cloud our judgment and lead us to embrace a path of lawlessness. Vigilantism, no matter how well-intentioned, is a threat to the very foundation of our justice system. It bypasses the crucial mechanisms we have in place to investigate crimes, prosecute wrongdoers, and ensure that punishment is meted out fairly and impartially.
This is why the outpouring of support for Mangione’s actions is so deeply troubling. Rather than celebrating those who take matters into their own hands, we should be honoring the brave individuals who reported Mangione to the authorities, recognizing that they upheld the principles of justice that keep our society functioning. Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro was right to call attention to the disturbing nature of the online reaction that has elevated Mangione to a position of admiration. The true heroes in this story are those who work within the system to bring justice, not those who seek to dismantle it through violence.
Vigilantism, by its nature, asks juries to ignore the law and deliver their own form of justice, based on the belief that the victim "deserved" to die. This notion is dangerous and flawed. Our legal system is based on the principle that every person, no matter their perceived wrongs, is entitled to a fair trial and due process. If we allow vigilantism to flourish, we risk replacing law and order with chaos and retribution, where each individual determines what constitutes justice.
We must also acknowledge that the political climate in the U.S. has, in recent years, fostered an environment in which division and retribution are encouraged. Our incoming president's rhetoric has, at times, provided a kind of "permission slip" for individuals to act on their own grievances, further polarizing an already fractured nation. This is a dangerous path—one that leads to further instability and harm. The values that undergird our democracy require thoughtful reflection and sacrifice, not violence or retaliation.
In times of injustice, we must resist the urge to take the law into our own hands. Instead, we should channel our anger and frustration into meaningful, lawful action—through protest, advocacy, and engagement in the democratic process. As John F. Kennedy so wisely stated, "If freedom is to survive and prosper, it will require the sacrifice, the effort and the thoughtful attention of every citizen." By taking these words to heart, we can navigate these difficult issues and ensure that justice, not mob rule, prevails.
OP ED Contributors from Cooley Law School:
Associate Dean and Professor Tonya Krause-Phelan