On Monday, September 22, 2025, President Donald Trump signed an executive order declaring the left-wing antifascist movement known as antifa a "domestic terrorist organization," a move that has reignited fierce debate about free speech, political violence, and the boundaries of presidential power. The order, which came just days after the assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk on a Utah college campus, directs all relevant executive departments and agencies to "investigate, disrupt, and dismantle any and all illegal operations" conducted by antifa or those who fund such actions, according to the White House.
The executive order, totaling 370 words, is the latest in a series of actions and pronouncements by the Trump administration aimed at left-wing protest groups. As reported by Reuters and The New York Times, the order threatens "investigatory and prosecutorial action" not only against people who commit crimes in the name of antifa, but also those who provide financial support to the movement. However, legal experts and civil rights advocates were quick to point out that the designation of "domestic terrorist organization" does not exist under U.S. law. Unlike foreign terrorist organizations, which the government can officially label and sanction, there is no equivalent domestic designation, largely due to constitutional protections around free speech and association.
Antifa itself is not a formal organization. According to the Anti-Defamation League, it is "a decentralized, leaderless movement composed of loose collections of groups, networks and individuals." While some extreme actors identifying as antifa have engaged in violence or vandalism at rallies and events, the ADL notes this is not the norm. The movement takes its name and iconography from the antifascist groups that opposed Nazi and other far-right parties in the early 20th century. Today, antifa is associated with aggressive protest tactics, sometimes crossing into illegal or violent activity such as property damage or confrontations with far-right demonstrators.
The timing of the executive order is closely tied to the murder of Charlie Kirk, a prominent conservative activist with close ties to Trump. Kirk was killed on September 10 while speaking at a Utah college. A 22-year-old technical college student has been charged with his murder, but investigators have not yet identified a motive or linked the suspect to any political group, including antifa. Despite the lack of evidence connecting the killing to left-wing groups, the Trump administration has used the incident to revive longstanding plans to target what it views as hostile political movements.
Federal law enforcement agencies, including the FBI's Counterterrorism and Counterintelligence Divisions, are now tasked with tracking both domestic and foreign sources of funding for antifa, as outlined in the order. A White House source told Reuters that the designation gives the administration "the authority to subpoena banks, look at wire transfers, foreign and domestic sources of funding, that kind of thing." However, it remains unclear who, if anyone, would be specifically targeted by such probes. The FBI already investigates violent and organized crime associated with a range of hate groups and ideological movements, and its surveillance of U.S. citizens is subject to strict legal limitations.
Critics from across the political spectrum have raised concerns that the executive order may serve as an attack on free speech and a tool to intimidate opponents of the president. Legal scholars have noted that criminalizing adherence to an ideology—rather than prosecuting specific illegal acts—runs counter to the First Amendment. As The New York Times reported, the Trump administration's language in the order echoes actions taken against foreign groups, such as drug cartels and terrorist organizations, but lacks the same legal force. Federal law empowers the government to label overseas groups as "foreign terrorist organizations," allowing for asset freezes and criminal penalties for material support. No such framework exists for purely domestic groups.
“While some extreme actors who claim to be affiliated with antifa do engage in violence or vandalism at rallies and events, this is not the norm,” the Anti-Defamation League states on its website, underscoring the diffuse and amorphous nature of the movement. The lack of centralized leadership, membership rolls, or bank accounts makes antifa a particularly elusive target for traditional law enforcement approaches.
Trump administration officials have repeatedly sought to portray left-wing groups as the primary drivers of political violence in the United States, especially following Kirk's death. However, political violence experts and law enforcement have previously identified far-right attacks as the leading source of domestic violent extremism. This context has fueled skepticism among civil liberties advocates, who argue that the order is more about political theater and intimidation than effective law enforcement.
In response to the executive order, Democratic leaders in Congress have signaled plans to meet with President Trump to discuss a range of issues, including the implications of the order and efforts to avert a government shutdown. Senator Chuck Schumer and Representative Hakeem Jeffries, both of New York, are among those expected to participate in the discussions, according to officials familiar with the matter.
The controversy over the antifa order comes amid a broader campaign by the Trump administration to pressure critics, political opponents, and media institutions. Over the weekend, President Trump publicly demanded that the Justice Department move quickly to prosecute his political enemies, including former FBI Director James Comey, New York Attorney General Letitia James, and Democratic Senator Adam Schiff. The administration has also faced criticism for its handling of federal prosecutor appointments, most recently with the abrupt replacement of the U.S. attorney in the Eastern District of Virginia by Lindsey Halligan, a Trump loyalist with little prosecutorial experience.
Free speech concerns have also been inflamed by recent events in the media world. ABC's suspension and subsequent reinstatement of "Jimmy Kimmel Live!" after the host made controversial remarks about the Kirk killing became a flashpoint for debates over censorship and government intimidation. The American Civil Liberties Union published an open letter signed by more than 500 entertainers condemning the suspension as "unconstitutional and un-American." Anna M. Gomez, the sole Democratic commissioner of the FCC, applauded Disney for "its courage in the face of clear government intimidation" after the show was brought back.
As the administration presses forward with its campaign against antifa and other perceived adversaries, legal experts warn that attempts to expand the president's authority to target domestic groups could face significant constitutional challenges. The U.S. government has historically refrained from designating domestic organizations as terrorist entities, in large part to protect the freedoms of speech and association enshrined in the Constitution.
For now, the Trump administration's executive order stands as a symbolic gesture—one that may galvanize supporters but is unlikely to have immediate legal consequences. The debate over the boundaries of protest, the definition of terrorism, and the appropriate limits of presidential power appears far from settled, with the nation watching closely as events continue to unfold.
