Late on Wednesday evening, during the second day of his UK state visit, President Trump followed through on his threats in the aftermath of Charlie Kirk’s assassination and announced that he would designate Antifa as a “major terrorist organisation”.
“I am pleased to inform our many USA Patriots that I am designating ANTIFA, A SICK, DANGEROUS, RADICAL LEFT DISASTER, AS A MAJOR TERRORIST ORGANIZATION.
“I will also be strongly recommending that those funding ANTIFA be thoroughly investigated in accordance with the highest legal standards and practices. Thank you for your attention to this matter!” Donald Trump posted on Truth Social Wednesday night.
However, Trump, who was called “the Hitler of our time” by Antifa protesters while carrying out a recent restaurant photo op in Washington, DC, will face an immediate legal hurdle. Antifa is an abbreviation for “anti fascist,” a loose term for an ideology rather than any specific organisation or legally defined group.
Trump also failed to make clear what legal mechanism could be used to begin designating domestic groups as terrorists, such as the FBI’s list of Foreign Terrorist Organisations (FTO).
Trump’s previous FBI director, Christopher Wray, stated in 2020 testimony that Antifa is an ideology, not an organisation, lacking the hierarchical structure that would usually allow it to be designated as a terror group by the federal government.
Given these circumstances, it remains uncertain how Trump or his administration would implement any declaration made by the Department of Justice or the U.S. Intelligence Community concerning ANTIFA.
Any instruction issued by the administration is expected to encounter legal opposition, considering that labelling an entire political ideology as terrorism would carry significant First Amendment consequences.
The US lacks a framework to prosecute individuals specifically for domestic terrorism, typically opting instead to pursue charges for whatever specific criminal acts someone is alleged to have committed.
Nevertheless, numerous states classify terrorism as an additional charge when a criminal offence is carried out in a manner intended to frighten civilian populations or affect government policy, reports the MirrorUS.
Earlier this week, a New York judge dismissed the additional terrorism charge against suspected UnitedHealthcare CEO shooter Luigi Mangione.
This New York State legislation was enacted in 2001, merely six days following the 9/11 attacks, with officials stating the state required “legislation that is specifically designed to combat the evils of terrorism.”
Supporters highlighted that many cases could emerge through state and local law enforcement agencies, rather than solely from federal investigations.
Numerous other states enacted comparable legislation around the same period, whilst Congress passed the Patriot Act. If a defendant is found guilty, the terrorism label escalates the underlying crime into a more severe sentencing category.
For instance, an assault typically punishable by up to 25 years in prison could result in a potential life sentence.
In Mangione’s case, one of the terror-murder charges carried a compulsory life sentence. The remaining murder charge against him carries a penalty of 15 years to life in prison if he’s found guilty.