The debate over how American law enforcement and political leaders should respond to violence connected to transgender individuals has erupted into a national flashpoint following the high-profile assassination of conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. In the wake of Kirk’s killing, conservative organizations, the White House, and prominent figures in the Trump-aligned political sphere have seized on the tragedy to call for new domestic terrorism designations—specifically targeting what they call “Transgender Ideology-Inspired Violent Extremism,” or TIVE.
On Thursday, September 18, 2025, the influential Heritage Foundation and its recently spun-off Oversight Project launched a petition urging the FBI to add TIVE to its official list of domestic extremist threats. “The time has come for the federal government to use the full weight of federal law enforcement to crush this threat and keep Americans safe,” the Oversight Project declared in a statement, as reported by The Independent. The groups cited the assassination of Charlie Kirk as the “latest example” in what they allege is a growing pattern of violence inspired by transgender activism.
Yet, the evidence for a broader trend is, at best, exceedingly thin. According to the Gun Violence Archive, only about 0.1 percent of mass shootings in the past decade were carried out by transgender individuals. A study from The Violence Prevention Project at Hamline University supports this finding, and PolitiFact has reported that “trans people are more likely to be victims of violence than their cisgender peers.” Despite these statistics, the Heritage Foundation’s campaign has found traction among some in the MAGA movement, who have long attempted to portray America’s estimated 2.8 million transgender people as uniquely prone to violence and instability.
Project 2025, the policy blueprint closely tied to Donald Trump’s second administration, has fueled these efforts. The Oversight Project, now independent but still led by Mike Howell—a visiting fellow at Heritage and former Department of Homeland Security oversight counsel—has been at the forefront of the push. Howell asserted, “To understand transgender ideology is to understand that at its core, it’s wrapped in violence—at its very essence.”
The groups’ petition defined TIVE in broad terms, encompassing not only acts of political violence but also common rhetoric among trans rights activists. The Oversight Project’s public explanation claimed that “TIVE adherents have carried out horrific acts of political violence through assassination and targeted mass shootings of Christians in furtherance of their ideology.” The definition extended to those who believe anti-trans rhetoric or policies “constitute a form of violence” or threaten trans lives by contributing to the community’s high suicide rate. If adopted, such a definition could arguably cover a wide range of progressive activism and speech.
Among the examples of supposed TIVE-motivated attacks provided by the campaign, only a handful appeared to have any clear political motive. One case cited was that of Robin Westman, the Minneapolis shooter, whose diary actually echoed Heritage Foundation rhetoric, expressing regret about transitioning and feeling “brainwashed.” Another included the recent assassination of Charlie Kirk.
Details about Kirk’s killing, however, complicate the narrative. Early reports and court documents indicate the alleged assassin, Tyler Robinson, is a cisgender man who grew up in a pro-Trump family but had recently moved leftward politically. According to LGBTQ Nation, Robinson was reportedly dating his transgender roommate, who was “aghast” at his confession and quickly cooperated with police, turning over incriminating text messages. The roommate’s shocked replies—“What?????????????? You’re joking, right????” and “you weren’t the one who did it right????”—demonstrate her lack of involvement or foreknowledge. Authorities have noted that Robinson has made no explicit statements to investigators about his beliefs or motives, and the investigation remains in its early stages.
Nevertheless, the administration has seized on the incident to justify a crackdown on transgender people. On Friday, September 19, 2025, Vice President J.D. Vance told Fox News’ Jesse Waters, “If you are encouraging people to commit acts of violence against the US government or against your fellow Americans, absolutely—you’re involved in a terrorist movement.” Vance elaborated, “What you increasingly see is you see people in the trans community and other members of the far left who are saying they are so threatened by negative rhetoric that they must take arms and attack people.”
This rhetoric echoes a recently leaked homeland security intelligence report warning of a “Radical Leftist Trans Militant Cult,” as detailed in reporting by independent journalist Ken Klippenstein. The FBI, Klippenstein reported, has developed a new “Nihilistic Violent Extremist (NVE)” category, which it plans to use for trans suspects. Yet, some officials—and the Heritage Foundation—argue that this label is too broad and politically motivated, falling short of explicitly naming the transgender threat.
Mike Howell, in a post on X (formerly Twitter), criticized the FBI’s reluctance: “Disappointed that @FBIDirectorKash is, to date, unwilling to name the threat of Transgender Ideology Inspired Violent Extremism specifically as domestic terrorism.” The Oversight Project has since promised to submit a formal mock designation for the FBI to implement and intends to publish it once ready.
Despite these calls, the FBI faces significant legal and procedural barriers. According to policies obtained by Howell through a Freedom of Information Act request, agents are restricted from conducting investigations based solely on gender identity or gathering such information. The U.S. government also lacks the legal authority to designate domestic organizations as terrorist groups, instead relying on broad categories such as “Racially/Ethnically Motivated Violent Extremism” and “Abortion-Related Violent Extremism.”
The political climate, however, is shifting. Trump’s counterterrorism czar, Sebastian Gorka, has amplified claims of transgender violence on social media, referencing both the Kirk assassination and other incidents, such as the Annunciation Catholic Church attack in Minneapolis by Robert Westman. Gorka asked his followers, “Were you aware that the young man who tried to assassinate Supreme Court Justice Kavanaugh is also ‘transgender’ and changed his name to Sophie?”
Meanwhile, Republican lawmakers are seizing the moment to push a raft of anti-LGBTQ+ measures. Representative Nancy Mace (R-SC) has introduced a spending bill containing six provisions targeting LGBTQ+ rights, including care bans, a Pride flag ban, and restrictions on data collection about LGBTQ+ servicemembers. Critics warn that such legislation could serve as a vehicle for broader attacks on LGBTQ+ rights.
Amid this political storm, LGBTQ+ advocates warn that the rhetoric and policy proposals risk stoking further fear and violence against a community that, according to PolitiFact and the Gun Violence Archive, is far more likely to be a victim than a perpetrator of violence. “This reporting was reckless and irresponsible, and it led to a wave of threats against the trans community from right-wing influencers—and a resulting wave of terror for a community that is already living in fear,” the Human Rights Campaign said in a press release following misleading reports about Kirk’s murder.
California state senator Scott Wiener added, “The obsession with tying trans people to shootings is vile and dangerous.” He continued, “First they try to say the shooter might be trans, and WSJ amplifies that lie. Once that fell apart, they pivot to ‘he lived with a trans person.’ Even if true, who cares? It’s McCarthyism and truly disgusting.”
As the FBI, lawmakers, and advocacy groups grapple with these competing narratives, the story of Charlie Kirk’s murder has become a prism through which America’s ongoing culture wars over gender, violence, and civil liberties are refracted. The outcome of the current debate may well shape the future of domestic counterterrorism policy—and the lives of millions of transgender Americans.
