Domestic Terrorism: An Overview

Congressional research reportAug 21, 2017

Ask Donna

What actually matters in this document.

Text

,name redacted,

Specialist in Organized Crime and Terrorism

August 21, 2017

Congressional Research Service

7-....

www.crs.gov

R44921

Domestic Terrorism: An Overview

Summary

The emphasis of counterterrorism policy in the United States since Al Qaeda’s attacks of

September 11, 2001 (9/11) has been on jihadist terrorism. However, in the last decade, domestic

terrorists—people who commit crimes within the homeland and draw inspiration from U.S.-based

extremist ideologies and movements—have killed American citizens and damaged property across

the country. Not all of these criminals have been prosecuted under federal terrorism statutes,

which does not imply that domestic terrorists are taken any less seriously than other terrorists.

The Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) do not officially

designate domestic terrorist organizations, but they have openly delineated domestic terrorist

“threats.” These include individuals who commit crimes in the name of ideologies supporting

animal rights, environmental rights, anarchism, white supremacy, anti-government ideals, black

separatism, and beliefs about abortion.

The boundary between constitutionally protected legitimate protest and domestic terrorist activity

has received public attention. This boundary is highlighted by a number of criminal cases

involving supporters of animal rights—one area in which specific legislation related to domestic

terrorism has been crafted. The Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act (P.L. 109-374) expands the

federal government’s legal authority to combat animal rights extremists who engage in criminal

activity. Signed into law in November 2006, it amended the Animal Enterprise Protection Act of

1992 (P.L. 102-346).

This report is intended as a primer on the issue, and four discussion topics in it may help explain

domestic terrorism’s relevance for policymakers:



Level of Activity. Domestic terrorists have been responsible for orchestrating

numerous incidents since 9/11.

Use of Nontraditional Tactics. A large number of domestic terrorists do not

necessarily use tactics such as suicide bombings or airplane hijackings. They

have been known to engage in activities such as vandalism, trespassing, and tax

fraud, for example.

Exploitation of the Internet. Domestic terrorists—much like their jihadist

analogues—are often Internet and social-media savvy and use such platforms to

share ideas and as resources for their operations.

Decentralized Nature of the Threat. Many domestic terrorists rely on the

concept of leaderless resistance. This involves two levels of activity. On an

operational level, militant, underground, ideologically motivated cells or

individuals engage in illegal activity without any participation in or direction

from an organization that maintains traditional leadership positions and

membership rosters. On another level, the above-ground public face (the

“political wing”) of a domestic terrorist movement may focus on propaganda and

the dissemination of ideology—engaging in protected speech.

Congressional Research Service

Domestic Terrorism: An Overview

Contents

Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 1

Domestic Terrorism Defined ........................................................................................................... 2

What Is Domestic Terrorism?.................................................................................................... 3

Toward a Narrower Definition ............................................................................................ 4

Ambiguity Regarding “U.S.-Based Extremist Ideologies” ................................................. 4

Factors Complicating the Descriptions of the Domestic Terrorism Threat ............................... 5

Counting Terrorism Cases ................................................................................................... 5

Sifting Domestic Terrorism from Other Illegal Activity ..................................................... 6

Extremism vs. Terrorism ..................................................................................................... 8

The Lack of an Official Public List .................................................................................... 9

Toward a Practical Definition: Threats Not Groups ................................................................ 10

Animal Rights Extremists and Environmental Extremists.................................................11

Anarchist Extremists ......................................................................................................... 13

White Supremacist Extremists .......................................................................................... 16

Anti-Government Extremists ............................................................................................ 23

Black Separatist Extremists .............................................................................................. 32

Abortion Extremists .......................................................................................................... 33

Protected Activities vs. Terrorism—Divergent Perceptions of the ALF ................................. 35

A Serious Domestic Concern or “Green Scare?” .............................................................. 35

Assessing Domestic Terrorism’s Significance............................................................................... 39

Counting Incidents .................................................................................................................. 40

“Nonviolent” Strategies .......................................................................................................... 41

Direct Action ..................................................................................................................... 41

The ALF: “Live Liberations” and “Economic Sabotage” ................................................. 42

The ELF: “Monkeywrenching” ........................................................................................ 42

“Paper Terrorism”: Liens, Frivolous Lawsuits, and Tax Schemes .................................... 46

The Internet and Domestic Terrorists ...................................................................................... 48

A Decentralized Threat............................................................................................................ 50

Leaderless Resistance ....................................................................................................... 50

Lone Wolves ..................................................................................................................... 53

Scoping the Threat Remains Difficult for Policymakers ............................................................... 57

Terminology ............................................................................................................................ 57

Designating Domestic Terrorist Groups .................................................................................. 57

A Public Accounting of Plots and Incidents ............................................................................ 58

Better Sense of Scope May Assist Policymakers .................................................................... 59

Figures

Figure 1. ALF and ELF Guidelines ............................................................................................... 45

Contacts

Author Contact Information .......................................................................................................... 59

Congressional Research Service

Domestic Terrorism: An Overview

Introduction

Since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 (9/11), domestic terrorists—people who commit

crimes within the homeland and draw inspiration from U.S.-based extremist ideologies and

movements1—have not received as much attention from federal law enforcement as their violent

jihadist counterparts. This was not necessarily always the case. The Federal Bureau of

Investigation (FBI) reported in 1999 that “[d]uring the past 30 years, the vast majority—but not

all—of the deadly terrorist attacks occurring in the United States have been perpetrated by

domestic extremists.”2

The U.S. government reacted to 9/11 by greatly enhancing its counterterrorism efforts. This report

discusses how domestic terrorists broadly fit into the counterterrorism landscape, a terrain that

since 9/11 has been largely shaped in response to terrorists inspired by foreign ideologies. This

report focuses especially on how domestic terrorism is conceptualized by the federal government

and issues involved in assessing this threat’s significance. Today (perhaps in part because of the

government’s focus on international terrorist ideologies), it is difficult to evaluate the scope of

domestic terrorist activity. For example, federal agencies employ varying terminology and

definitions to describe it.

Possibly contributing to domestic terrorism’s secondary status as a threat at the federal level, a

large number of those labeled as domestic terrorists do not necessarily use traditional terrorist

tactics such as bombings or airplane hijackings. Additionally, many domestic terrorists do not

intend to physically harm people but rather rely on alternative tactics such as theft, trespassing,

destruction of property, and burdening U.S. courts with retaliatory legal filings.

While plots and attacks by foreign-inspired homegrown violent jihadists have earned more media

attention, domestic terrorists have been busy as well. It is worth noting that in terms of casualties

on U.S. soil, an act of domestic terrorism is second only to the events of 9/11. Timothy McVeigh’s

bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City on April 19, 1995, claimed

168 lives and injured more than 500 others. Some estimates suggest that domestic terrorists are

responsible for carrying out dozens of incidents since 9/11.3 Much like their jihadist counterparts,

domestic terrorists are often Internet savvy and use the medium as a resource for their operations.

Terrorists are typically driven by particular ideologies. In this respect, domestic terrorists are a

widely divergent lot, drawing from a broad array of philosophies and worldviews. These

individuals can be motivated to commit crimes in the name of ideas such as animal rights, white

supremacy, and abortion, for example. However, the expression of these worldviews (minus the

commission of crimes) involves constitutionally protected activity.

This conceptualization of the term “domestic terrorism” is derived from a number of U.S. government sources

detailed in this report. This report will not focus on homegrown violent jihadists. However, when referring to such

actors, for this report, “homegrown” describes terrorist activity or plots perpetrated within the United States or abroad

by American citizens, permanent legal residents, or visitors radicalized largely within the United States. “Jihadist”

describes radicalized Muslims using Islam as an ideological and/or religious justification for belief in the establishment

of a global caliphate—a jurisdiction governed by a Muslim civil and religious leader known as a caliph—via violent

means. Jihadists largely adhere to a variant of Salafi Islam—the fundamentalist belief that society should be governed

by Islamic law based on the Quran and follow the model of the immediate followers and companions of the Prophet

Muhammad.

Federal Bureau of Investigation, Terrorism in the United States: 30 Years of Terrorism—A Special Retrospective

Edition, (2000) p. 16.

New America Foundation, Terrorism in America After 9/11: Part IV, What is the Threat to the United States Today?

https://www.newamerica.org/in-depth/terrorism-in-america/what-threat-united-states-today/.

Congressional Research Service

Domestic Terrorism: An Overview

Aware of the lines between constitutionally protected speech and criminality, domestic terrorists

often rope themselves off from ideological (above-ground) elements that openly and often legally

espouse similar beliefs. In essence, the practitioners who commit violent acts are distinct from the

propagandists who theorize and craft worldviews that could be interpreted to support these acts.

Thus, in decentralized fashion, terrorist lone actors (lone wolves) or isolated small groups (cells)

generally operate autonomously and in secret, all the while drawing ideological sustenance—not

direction—from propagandists operating in the free market of ideas.

Domestic terrorists may not be the top federal counterterrorism priority, but they feature

prominently among the concerns of some law enforcement officers. For example, in 2011, Los

Angeles Deputy Police Chief Michael P. Downing included “black separatists, white

supremacist/sovereign citizen extremists, and animal rights terrorists” among his chief

counterterrorism concerns.4 A 2014 national survey of state and local law enforcement officers

found that sovereign citizens were “the top concern” among terrorist threats.5

The violence related to protests in Charlottesville, VA, on August 12, 2017, also has raised the

issue of domestic terrorism, particularly related to public discussions regarding a widely reported

incident involving James Alex Fields, who according to witnesses drove his car into a group of

people protesting a rally featuring white supremacists in Charlottesville on August 12.6 Fields

allegedly killed one person and injured 19 others in the incident. The Department of Justice

(DOJ) has opened a civil rights investigation into the incident, presumably pursuing possible hate

crime charges.7 Additionally, Attorney General Jeff Sessions has publicly stated that terrorism

investigators are involved in investigating the incident, ostensibly exploring the possibility of

characterizing it as an act of domestic terrorism rather than a hate crime.8

This report provides background regarding domestic terrorists—detailing what constitutes the

domestic terrorism threat as suggested by publicly available U.S. government sources. 9 It

illustrates some of the key factors involved in assessing this threat. This report does not discuss in

detail either violent jihadist-inspired terrorism or the federal government’s role in

counterterrorism investigations.

Domestic Terrorism Defined

Two basic questions are key to understanding domestic terrorism. First, what exactly constitutes

“domestic terrorism?” Answering this question is more complicated than it may appear. Some

Bill Gertz, “L.A. Police Use Intel Networks against Terror,” Washington Times, April 11, 2011. See also Joshua D.

Freilich, Steven M. Chermak & Joseph Simone Jr. “Surveying American State Police Agencies About Terrorism

Threats, Terrorism Sources, and Terrorism Definitions,” Terrorism and Political Violence, vol. 21, no. 3 (2009) pp.

450-475. Freilich, Chermak, and Simone found that domestic terrorist groups featured prominently among the concerns

of U.S. state police officials.

Jessica Rivinius, “Sovereign Citizen Movement Perceived as Top Terrorist Threat,” National Consortium for the

Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism, July 30, 2014. For the report, see Carter, David, et al., “Understanding

Law Enforcement Intelligence Processes,” National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to

Terrorism, 2014.

T. Rees Shapiro et. al., “Alleged Driver of Car that Plowed into Charlottesville Crowd Was a Nazi Sympathizer,

Former Teacher Says,” Washington Post, August 13, 2017.

Department of Justice, “Joint Statement from United States Attorney’s Office for the Western District of Virginia,

Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Civil Rights Division,” press release, August, 13, 2017.

Michael Edison Hayden, “Sessions Defends Trump’s Comments on Charlottesville, Says Car Ramming Fits

Definition of Domestic Terror,” ABC News, August 14, 2017.

This report does not presume the guilt of indicted individuals in pending criminal cases.

Congressional Research Service

Domestic Terrorism: An Overview

consider all terrorist plots occurring within the homeland as acts of domestic terrorism. According

to this perspective, a bombing plot involving U.S. citizens motivated by a foreign terrorist group

such as Al Qaeda or the Islamic State constitutes domestic terrorism. While this conceptualization

may be true at some level, a practical definition of domestic terrorism distilled from federal

sources is much narrower. It suggests that domestic terrorists are Americans who commit

ideologically driven crimes in the United States but lack foreign direction or influence—whether

tactical or philosophical. This conceptualization excludes homegrown individuals directed or

motivated by groups such as Al Qaeda or the Islamic State. Second, what particular groups are

considered domestic terrorist organizations? The U.S. government does not provide a precise,

comprehensive, and public answer to this question. Rather, in broad terms, DOJ has identified a

number of general threats that embody this issue. The ideological concepts that underpin such

threats may inspire criminal activity, such as hate crimes, that do not rise to the level of terrorism.

This further complicates defining “domestic terrorism.”

What Is Domestic Terrorism?

In the most general statutory terms, a domestic terrorist engages in terrorist activity that occurs in

the homeland. The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI, the Bureau) has lead responsibility for

terrorism investigations at the federal level.10

The FBI generally relies on two fundamental sources to define domestic terrorism. First, the Code

of Federal Regulations characterizes “terrorism” as including “the unlawful use of force and

violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population,

or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.”11 Second, 18 U.S.C.

Section 2331(5) more narrowly defines “domestic terrorism” and differentiates it from

international terrorism and other criminal activity.12 This definition comes from Section 802 of

the USA PATRIOT Act (P.L. 107-56). According to 18 U.S.C. Section 2331(5), domestic

terrorism occurs primarily within U.S. territorial jurisdiction, and involves

(A) ... acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United

States or of any State;

(B) appear to be intended—

(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;

(ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or

(iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or

kidnapping.... 13

28 C.F.R. §0.85.

Ibid.

U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, “Responses of John E. Lewis [then Deputy

Assistant Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation] to Additional Questions from Senator Obama,” Eco-Terrorism

Specifically Examining the Earth Liberation Front and the Animal Liberation Front, 109th Cong., 1st sess., May 18,

2005, S. Hrg. 109-947 (Washington: GPO, 2007), p. 41. Hereinafter: Responses of John E. Lewis.

18 U.S.C. §2331(5).

Congressional Research Service

Domestic Terrorism: An Overview

Enforcement—Joint Terrorism Task Forces

Aside from the FBI, other federal agencies such as the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and Explosives (ATF) and

the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) play a role in enforcement efforts to counter domestic terrorism. These

agencies—as well as state and local law enforcement representatives—typically cooperate within the framework of

Joint Terrorism Task Forces (JTTFs), multi-agency investigative units led by DOJ and the FBI across the country.14

JTTFs are teams of police officers, federal agents, analysts, linguists, SWAT experts, and other specialists who

investigate terrorism and terrorism-related crimes. Seventy-one of the more than 100 JTTFs operated by DOJ and

the FBI were created since 9/11. About 4,000 federal, state, and local law enforcement officers and agents—more

than four times the pre-9/11 total—work in them. These officers and agents come from more than 500 state and

local agencies and 50 federal agencies.15

The FBI considers JTTFs “the nation’s front line on terrorism.”16 They “investigate acts of terrorism that affect the

U.S., its interests, property and citizens, including those employed by the U.S. and military personnel overseas.”17 As

this suggests, their operations are highly tactical and can involve developing human sources (informants) as well as

gathering intelligence to thwart terrorist plots. JTTFs also offer an important conduit for the sharing of intelligence

developed from FBI-led counterterrorism investigations with outside agencies and state and local law enforcement.18

Toward a Narrower Definition

The definitions cited above are too broad to capture what the FBI specifically investigates as

“domestic terrorism.” Besides the statutory definitions regarding the crime of domestic terrorism,

the FBI has historically emphasized particular qualities inherent to the actors who engage in

domestic terrorism. According to the Bureau, domestic terrorists do not simply operate in the

homeland, but they also lack foreign direction.19 In fact, the Bureau’s practical, shorthand

definition of domestic terrorism is “Americans attacking Americans based on U.S.-based

extremist ideologies.”20 The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) follows this construction.21

Ambiguity Regarding “U.S.-Based Extremist Ideologies”

On the surface, the FBI’s shorthand definition for domestic terrorism appears straightforward.

However, there is inherent ambiguity to it. Namely, some of the “U.S.-based extremist

ideologies” driving what the Bureau views as domestic terrorism have international roots and

active followings abroad. The ideologies supporting eco-extremism and animal rights extremism

(discussed below) readily come to mind, and people have long committed crimes in their names

outside the United States.22 At least in part, their origins lay in the United Kingdom. Nazism—

Federal Bureau of Investigation, “Joint Terrorism Task Forces.”

Ibid.

Federal Bureau of Investigation, “Protecting America against Terrorist Attack: A Closer Look at Our Joint Terrorism

Task Forces,” May 2009.

Brig Barker and Steve Fowler, “The FBI Joint Terrorism Task Force Officer,” The FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin,

vol. 77, no. 11 (November 2008), p. 13.

Kevin Johnson, “FBI Issues More Top Secret Clearance for Terrorism Cases,” USA Today, August 12, 2010;

STRATFOR, A Decade of Evolution in U.S. Counterterrorism Operations, Special Report, December 2009.

James F. Jarboe, [then Domestic Terrorism Section Chief, Counterterrorism Division] Federal Bureau of

Investigation, Testimony Before the House Resources Committee, Subcommittee on Forests and Forest Health,

February 12, 2002. Hereinafter: Jarboe, Testimony.

Federal Bureau of Investigation, “Domestic Terrorism in the Post-9/11 Era,” September 7, 2009. Hereinafter: Federal

Bureau of Investigation, “Domestic Terrorism.”

See Department of Homeland Security, “Domestic Terrorism and Homegrown Violent Extremism Lexicon,”

November 10, 2011. Hereinafter: Department of Homeland Security, “Domestic Terrorism and Homegrown.”

See Gary A. Ackerman, “Beyond Arson? A Threat Assessment of the Earth Liberation Front,” Terrorism and

(continued...)

Congressional Research Service

Domestic Terrorism: An Overview

with its German origins and foreign believers—is an element within domestic white supremacist

extremism. Anarchism, the philosophy followed by anarchist extremists, also has long-standing

European roots. The racist skinhead movement traces its origins abroad—to the United

Kingdom—as well. These examples illustrate the FBI’s challenge when it emphasizes U.S.-based

ideologies in its framing of domestic terrorism.

Factors Complicating the Descriptions of the Domestic

Terrorism Threat

A few more issues make it hard to grasp the breadth of domestic terrorist activity in the United

States. First, counting the number of terrorist prosecutions or plots in general has been difficult in

the post-9/11 period. Second, there may be some ambiguity in the investigative process regarding

exactly when criminal activity becomes domestic terrorism. Third, the federal government

appears to use the terms “terrorist” and “extremist” interchangeably when referring to domestic

terrorism. It is unclear why this is the case. Finally, and most importantly, which specific groups

are and should be considered domestic terrorist organizations? The U.S. government does not

provide a public answer to this question. Rather, the federal government defines the issue in terms

of “threats,” not groups.

Counting Terrorism Cases

While statutory and practical federal definitions exist for “domestic terrorism,” there is little clear

sense of the scope of the domestic terrorist threat based on publicly available U.S. government

information. Most broadly, it has been said that in much of the post-9/11 period, the federal courts

and DOJ may have applied different parameters when sorting, counting, and categorizing all

types of terrorist prosecutions—let alone domestic terrorism cases.23 A 2009 study (critiqued by

DOJ) found that the U.S. federal district courts, DOJ’s National Security Division, and federal

prosecutors rely on different criteria to determine whether or not specific cases involve terrorism

at all.24

A bit more narrowly, in many instances, individuals considered to be domestic terrorists by

federal law enforcement may be charged under non-terrorism statutes, making it difficult to grasp

from the public record exactly how extensive this threat is. Regarding the prosecution of domestic

terrorism cases, no separate federal crime of “domestic terrorism” exists.25 Also, DOJ has noted

that, “[a]lthough we do have at least one specialized [federal] statute aimed at animal enterprise

terrorism,26 domestic terrorism cases often involve firearms, arson or explosive offenses; crimes

relating to fraud; and threats and hoaxes.”27 In some instances, the crimes committed by people

(...continued)

Political Violence, vol. 15, no. 4 (2003), pp. 155-156. Hereinafter: Ackerman, “Beyond Arson?”

Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC), Who Is a Terrorist? Government Failure to Define Terrorism

Undermines Enforcement, Puts Civil Liberties at Risk, September 8, 2009, http://trac.syr.edu/tracreports/terrorism/215/.

DOJ issued a press release that broadly challenged these findings and suggested that TRAC may have omitted certain

statistics in its study. TRAC refuted these claims. For the interchange between DOJ and TRAC, see http://trac.syr.edu/

tracreports/terrorism/219/.

Ibid.

Greg Myre, “Why the Government Can’t Bring Terrorism Charges in Charlottesville,” NPR, August 14, 2017.

This likely refers to the Animal Enterprise Protection Act from 1992. In late 2006 shortly after the white paper’s

publication, this act was amended by the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act.

Department of Justice, Counterterrorism White Paper, June 22, 2006, p. 59. Hereinafter: Department of Justice,

(continued...)

Congressional Research Service

Domestic Terrorism: An Overview

the FBI describes as domestic terrorism suspects do not violate federal law. When this occurs, the

Bureau, “support[s] [its local] partners any way [it] can—sharing intelligence, offering forensic

assistance, conducting behavioral analysis, etc.”28 Thus, individuals considered domestic

terrorists by federal law enforcement may not necessarily be federally charged as terrorists.

Sifting Domestic Terrorism from Other Illegal Activity

It may not be possible for investigators to describe the criminal activity involved early in an

investigation as domestic terrorism. In these instances, investigators can work toward clarifying

the motives of the suspects involved.29 Domestic terrorism cases differ from ordinary criminal

activity in key ways. Most importantly, unlike ordinary criminals—who are often driven by selfcentered motives such as profit and tend to opportunistically seek easy prey—domestic terrorists

are driven by a cause or ideology.30 If the motives involved align with the definition laid out in 18

U.S.C. Section 2331(5), presumably the case becomes a domestic terrorist investigation. In some

instances, ideologically motivated actors can also collaborate with profit-driven individuals to

commit crimes.

To further cloud matters, another category of criminal activity, hate crime, may appear to involve

ideological issues. However, as described by one federal official, a “hate crime” “generally

involve[s] acts of personal malice directed at individuals” and is missing the broader motivations

driving acts of domestic terrorism.31 For investigators, distinguishing between “personal malice”

and ideologically motivated actions may be difficult in specific cases. This suggests that sorting

domestic terrorism from hate crimes depends on the degree of a suspect’s intent. Did the suspect

articulate an ideology belonging to an extremist movement? The grey area between domestic

terrorism and hate crime hints that in some instances, suspects with links to domestic terrorist

movements or ideologies supporting domestic terrorism may be charged with hate crimes. 32 It is

unclear to what extent this influences how the government understands the threat posed by

extremist movements that hold racist beliefs. If some individuals of this ilk commit crimes

against police or judges, for example, is the government more apt to label this activity as

terrorism while individuals sharing these same racist motivations but targeting ordinary citizens

based on race, religion, disability, ethnic origin, or sexual orientation are charged with hate

crimes?

(...continued)

White Paper.

See CRS Legal Sidebar WSLG1858, Charlottesville Car Crash Attack: Possibility of Federal Criminal Prosecution,

by (name redacted)

. See also Federal Bureau of Investigation, “Domestic Terrorism.”

Responses of John E. Lewis, pp. 41, 42.

In some instances such as those involving white-supremacist prison gangs who espouse extremist beliefs, the profit

motive may be paramount in their criminal activity. See Joshua D. Freilich, Steven M. Chermak, and David Caspi,

“Critical Events in the Life Trajectories of Domestic Extremist White Supremacist Groups,” Criminology and Public

Policy, vol. 8, no. 3 (August 2009), p. 508. Hereinafter: Freilich, Chermak, and Caspi, “Critical Events.”

Responses of John E. Lewis, p. 41.

While this discussion focuses on intent, domestic terrorists can exhibit additional traits that distinguish them from

other offenders. For example, as part of their involvement in ideological movements, domestic terrorists often are

exposed to more tactical training—in weapons, explosives, arson, reconnaissance, paramilitary discipline—than many

more ordinary criminals. See Anti-Defamation League, Guidebook on Extremism for Law Enforcement, (2007), p. 9.

Hereinafter: Anti-Defamation League, Guidebook.

Congressional Research Service

Domestic Terrorism: An Overview

Two Cases Demonstrating Blurred Lines Between

Hate Crime and Domestic Terrorism

When it comes to characterizing ideologically inspired criminal actors for investigative purposes, the FBI occasionally

confronts suspects who can be viewed either as terrorists or as perpetrators of hate crimes. Precisely

understanding suspect’s motives (among other things) can be useful in categorizing his or her case as either a

domestic terrorism or hate crime investigation.33 However, when it comes to prosecution, one can say that such

considerations are somewhat more limited, namely because no separate federal crime of “domestic terrorism”

exists.34 Federal prosecutors can pursue hate crimes charges or other criminal offenses that fit the crime.35 While

pursing such non-terrorism charges, prosecutors may avoid publicly describing suspects as domestic terrorists.

Dylann Roof

On June 17, 2015, Dylann Roof shot and killed nine African Americans in the Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal

Church in Charleston, SC. Three churchgoers survived. DOJ pursued a case involving federal hate crimes and

firearms charges.36 Roof was sentenced to death by a federal jury.37 According to DOJ, before the shooting incident,

Roof had posted on a website a manuscript and photos “expressing his racist beliefs.” Additionally, DOJ argued that

he “wanted to increase racial tensions across the Nation, and sought retribution for perceived wrongs he believed

African-Americans had committed against white people.”38 Although it seems that Roof’s alleged motives had

ideological underpinnings in white supremacy, then-Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch noted in 2015 that DOJ

pursued federal hate crimes charges because “[w]e think that this is exactly the type of case that the federal hate

crimes statutes were, in fact, conceived to cover.”39

Kevin Harpham

The FBI’s public description of the case of confessed would-be bomber Kevin Harpham is an example of how

difficult it may be to characterize acts as domestic terrorism. Initially, the FBI viewed the case as domestic terrorism.

In 2011, Harpham, motivated by white supremacist ideology, left a bomb—which never detonated—along the route

of a parade in Spokane, WA, honoring Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. The FBI’s Northwest Joint Terrorism Task Force

led the investigation.40 In prepared public remarks framing the “current state of the terrorism threat” from April

2011, the then-FBI Assistant Director for the Counterterrorism Division noted that Harpham’s case was one of

“several recent domestic terrorism incidents [that] demonstrate the scope of the threat.”41 Harpham eventually

pled guilty to committing a federal hate crime and attempting to use a weapon of mass destruction.42 Thereafter, the

Bureau described the case as the successful prevention of a “horrific hate crime.”43

Investigating an individual as a terrorist may confer more resources to an investigation and may offer more

investigative options. Regarding the latter, see American Civil Liberties Union, “How the USA PATRIOT Act

Redefines ‘Domestic Terrorism,’” https://www.aclu.org/other/how-usa-patriot-act-redefines-domestic-terrorism.

Greg Myre, “Why the Government Can’t Bring Terrorism Charges in Charlottesville,” NPR, August 14, 2017.

For a discussion of federal hate crimes, see Department of Justice, “Hate Crime Laws,” https://www.justice.gov/crt/

hate-crime-laws.

Department of Justice, “Attorney General Lynch Statement Following the Federal Grand Jury Indictment Against

Dylann Storm Roof,” press release, July 22, 2015. DOJ also sought the death penalty. Department of Justice, “Attorney

General Loretta E. Lynch Statement on the Case of Dylann Roof,” press release, May 24, 2016.

Department of Justice, “Federal Jury Sentences Dylann Storm Roof to Death,” press release, January 10, 2017.

United States v. Dylann Storm Roof, indictment, U.S. District Court, District of South Carolina, June 20, 2015.

Christina Maza, “Why is Dylann Roof Not Facing Charges of Terrorism?” Christian Science Monitor, July 24, 2015.

Department of Justice, “Attempted Bomber Arrested,” press release, March 9, 2011.

Mark F. Giuliano, Assistant Director, Counterterrorism Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation, prepared remarks

delivered at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, Stein Program on Counterterrorism and Intelligence,

Washington, DC, April 14, 2011, http://www.fbi.gov/news/speeches/the-post-9-11-fbi-the-bureaus-response-toevolving-threats.

Department of Justice, “Attempted Bomber Pleads Guilty to Federal Hate Crime and Weapons Charge,” press

release, September 7, 2011.

Federal Bureau of Investigation, “MLK Parade Bomber,” January 13, 2012; Department of Justice, press release,

“Colville, Wash., Man Indicted for Federal Hate Crime in Attempted Bombing of the MLK Unity March,” press

release, April 21, 2011.

Congressional Research Service

Domestic Terrorism: An Overview

Extremism vs. Terrorism

Another concept that muddies discussion of domestic terrorism is “extremism.” The latter term is

commonly applied to homegrown actors, whether they be domestic terrorists or adherents of

ideologies forwarded by foreign groups such as Al Qaeda. National security expert Jonathan

Masters has suggested that many law enforcement officials likely view “extremism” as largely

synonymous with “terrorism.”44 Masters has also found that there is a “lack of uniformity in the

way domestic terrorist activities are prosecuted” in the United States.45 Presumably, using the

term “extremist” allows prosecutors, policymakers, and investigators the flexibility to discuss

terrorist-like activity without actually labeling it as “terrorism” and then having to prosecute it as

such. This flexibility is certainly an asset to prosecutors. They can charge subjects of FBI

domestic terrorism investigations under a wider array of statutes without having to convince a

jury that the accused were terrorists. However, for policymakers this flexibility makes it hard to

determine the scope of the domestic terrorist threat. One cannot get a clear sense of scope if some

individuals are charged and publicly described as terrorists, others are discussed as extremists,

and still others enter the public record only as criminals implicated in crimes not necessarily

associated with terrorism, such as trespassing, arson, and tax fraud.

What Is Extremism?

The FBI’s public formulation of “extremism” suggests two components. First, extremism

involves hewing to particular ideologies. Second, it also includes criminal activity to advance

these ideologies.46 Thus, according to this construction, an anarchist believes in a particular

ideology—anarchism. An “anarchist extremist” is an anarchist who adopts criminal tactics.47

One scholar has indicated a similar bifurcation: First, extremism refers to an ideology outside a

society’s key values, and for liberal democracies, such ideologies “support racial or religious

supremacy and/or oppose the core principles of democracy and human rights.” Second,

extremism can refer to the use of tactics that ignore the rights of others to achieve an

ideological goal.48

Jonathan Masters, Militant Extremists in the United States, Council on Foreign Relations, Washington, DC, February

7, 2011.

Ibid.

Federal Bureau of Investigation, “Domestic Terrorism: Anarchist Extremism, A Primer,” December 16, 2010. The

focus of this piece, as the title suggests, is anarchist extremism, not necessarily defining the term “extremism.”

Hereinafter: Federal Bureau of Investigation, “Anarchist Extremism.” This type of formulation—extremism consists of

adherence to ideologies and criminal activity committed in the name of these ideologies—is replicated in the

definitions provided within Department of Homeland Security, “Domestic Terrorism and Homegrown.”

Making things more complex, the broader concept of “violent extremism” was used by the Obama Administration.

According to the administration, “violent extremists” are “individuals who support or commit ideologically-motivated

violence to further political goals.” See Empowering Local Partners to Prevent Violent Extremism in the United States,

August 2011, p. 1.

Peter R. Neumann, Prisons and Terrorism: Radicalisation and De-Radicalisation in 15 Countries, International

Centre for the Study of Radicalisation and Political Violence, London, 2010, p. 12. In its Guidebook on Extremism for

Law Enforcement, Hereinafter: Neumann, Prisons and Terrorism. The Anti-Defamation League has defined extremists

as: “people who subscribe to extreme ideologies.” The group goes on to say, “extreme ideologies are those that promote

world views so radical that most other people will not agree with them.” See Anti-Defamation League, Guidebook, p.

Congressional Research Service

Domestic Terrorism: An Overview

“Homegrown Violent Extremists” Are Not Domestic Terrorists

The FBI and DHS have popularized the phrase “homegrown violent extremist” (HVE). It

separates domestic terrorists from U.S.-based terrorists motivated by the ideologies of foreign

terrorist organizations. According to DHS and the FBI, a HVE is “a person of any citizenship

who has lived and/or operated primarily in the United States or its territories who advocates, is

engaged in, or is preparing to engage in ideologically-motivated terrorist activities (including

providing support to terrorism) in furtherance of political or social objectives promoted by a

foreign terrorist organization, but is acting independently of direction by a foreign terrorist

organization.”49 According to the FBI and DHS, an HVE is not a domestic terrorist—they are two

distinct categories of terrorist actors.50

The Lack of an Official Public List

The federal government does not generate an official and public list of domestic terrorist

organizations or individuals.51 The development of such a list may be precluded by civil liberties

concerns (i.e., inclusion in a publicly available list may impinge on a group’s exercise of free

speech or its other constitutionally protected activities). However, a lack of official lists or

processes to designate groups or individuals as domestic terrorists makes it difficult to assess

domestic terrorism trends and evaluate federal efforts to counter such threats. In 2011, an

unnamed DHS official cited in a news report stated that “unlike international terrorism, there are

no designated domestic terrorist groups. Subsequently, all the legal actions of an identified

extremist group leading up to an act of violence are constitutionally protected and not reported on

by DHS.”52 Constitutionality aside, the lack of a list may also contribute to a certain vagueness in

the public realm about which groups the federal government considers domestic terrorist

organizations. While the government does not provide an official and public list of domestic

terrorist organizations, it does include domestic terrorists (along with international terrorists) in

its Terrorist Screening Database, commonly known as the “Terrorist Watchlist.”53

The government is much less vague regarding foreign terrorist organizations. They are officially

designated as such according to a well-established legally and procedurally proscribed regimen.

According to the Department of State’s Bureau of Counterterrorism, as of August 16, 2017, the

This definition appears to differ from the conceptualization of “homegrown jihadists” used in this report by (1) only

including individuals not directed by a foreign organization and by (2) including all sorts of terrorists motivated by

foreign ideologies, not just violent jihadists. See Department of Homeland Security and Federal Bureau of

Investigation, Joint Intelligence Bulletin, “Use of Small Arms: Examining Lone Shooters and Small-Unit Tactics,”

August 16, 2011, p. 3.

Ibid.

See (name redacted)avita, “Does the U.S. Have Any Domestic Terrorist Groups?” Homeland Security Watch, June

29, 2010. Hereinafter: Bellavita, “Domestic Terrorist Groups.” See also R. Jeffrey Smith, “Homeland Security

Department Curtails Home-Grown Terror Analysis,” Washington Post, June 7, 2011. Hereinafter: Smith, “Homeland

Security.” David E. Heller, “Designating Domestic Terrorist Individuals or Groups,” (Master’s Thesis, Naval

Postgraduate School, 2010). Hereinafter: Heller, “Designating Domestic.”

Smith, “Homeland Security.”

Federal Bureau of Investigation, Terrorist Screening Center, “Frequently Asked Questions.” See also Timothy J.

Healy, Director, Terrorist Screening Center, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Statement before the House Judiciary

Committee, Washington, DC, March 24, 2010; Bellavita, “Domestic Terrorist Groups.” For more information on the

Terrorist Screening Database, see CRS Report R44678, The Terrorist Screening Database and Preventing Terrorist

Travel, by (name redacted), (name redacted), and (name redacted)

Congressional Research Service

Domestic Terrorism: An Overview

Secretary of State had designated 61 foreign terrorist organizations according to Section 219 of

the Immigration and Nationality Act, as amended.54

Toward a Practical Definition: Threats Not Groups

As discussed above, DOJ and the FBI do not list domestic terrorist organizations publicly and

officially. This may complicate the understanding that federal policymakers have of what exactly

the government considers “domestic terrorism.” While not naming specific groups, DOJ and the

FBI have openly delineated domestic terrorist threats. DOJ has identified domestic terrorism

threats to include criminal activity by animal rights extremists, ecoterrorists, anarchists, antigovernment extremists such as ‘sovereign citizens’ and unauthorized militias, black separatists,

white supremacists, and abortion extremists.55

The actors who constitute each of the domestic terrorist “threats” outlined by DOJ draw upon

ideologies whose expression largely involves constitutionally protected activity. The FBI

safeguards against cases focused solely on constitutionally protected activities. All FBI

investigations have to be conducted for an authorized national security, criminal, or foreign

intelligence collection purpose.56 The purpose of an investigation may not be to solely monitor

First Amendment rights.57

However, it is unclear how DOJ or the FBI arrive at their list of domestic terrorism threats. This

poses at least two fundamental questions:



How does a particular brand of dissent become ripe for description by DOJ and

the FBI as driving a “domestic terrorism” threat?

What criteria are involved in such a process?

How many crimes or plots attributed to a specific ideology have to occur to stimulate

the identification of a new extremist threat? Is the severity of the crimes linked to an

ideology taken into consideration?

For the legal criteria used to designate a foreign terrorist organization, the legal ramifications of designation, and

ancillary effects of designation see Department of State, “Foreign Terrorist Organizations,” https://www.state.gov/j/ct/

rls/other/des/123085.htm.

Department of Justice, White Paper, p. 59. See also Federal Bureau of Investigation, “Domestic Terrorism.” In recent

years, the FBI has switched from “anti-abortion” to abortion extremism, thus including individuals who may commit

crimes to protect abortion rights. The FBI’s domestic terrorism investigations likely cover these categories as well as

lone wolves (lone offenders): extremists who commit crimes without the support of a formal organization or network.

Some lone wolves are motivated by the ideologies behind the threats outlined by DOJ, but they can fashion their own

ideologies as well. In the past, in the area of domestic terrorism, the FBI has distinguished between “special interest

terrorism” and “traditional right-wing and left-wing terrorism: “Special interest terrorism differs from traditional rightwing and left-wing terrorism in that extremist special interest groups seek to resolve specific issues, rather than effect

widespread political change. Special interest extremists continue to conduct acts of politically motivated violence to

force segments of society, including the general public, to change attitudes about issues considered important to their

causes. These groups occupy the extreme fringes of animal rights, pro-life, environmental, anti-nuclear, and other

movements.” It is unclear whether the FBI still uses the categories of “special interest,” “left-wing,” and “right-wing”

terrorism. See Jarboe, Testimony. See also Federal Bureau of Investigation, “What are Known Violent Extremist

Groups?” https://www.fbi.gov/cve508/teen-website/what-are-known-violent-extremist-groups. This is from a website

Regardless, it is one of the few publicly-available sources where the Bureau succinctly describes numerous violent

extremist groups or ideologies.

Federal Bureau of Investigation, Domestic Investigations and Operations Guide, redacted, October 15, 2011, p. 4-1

through p. 4-2.

Ibid.

Congressional Research Service

Domestic Terrorism: An Overview



At what point do ideologically driven domestic terrorism threats cease to exist?

Should there be a means for public petitioning of the government to eliminate

various threats as investigative priorities?

The below discussion of domestic terrorism threats does not necessarily presume the priority of

one over the other.58 It is also important to note that instances of animal rights extremism and

ecoterrorism within the last fifteen years are more readily available in the public record than

cases involving other types of domestic terrorism.59 The extensive use of such examples in this

report does not imply the prominence of animal rights extremism or ecoterrorism over other

domestic terrorist threats.

Animal Rights Extremists and Environmental Extremists

The term “animal rights extremism” covers criminal acts committed in the name of animal

rights.60 Environmental extremism—most often referred to as “ecoterrorism”—includes criminal

acts committed in the name of the environment.61 These terms are not applied to groups or

individuals involved with environmental movements or animal welfare protection/rights activism

within the “confines of civil society and the rule of law.”62

Many of the crimes committed by both animal rights extremists and ecoterrorists are perpetrated

by independent small cells or individuals who harass and intimidate their victims.63 These cells or

lone actors engage in crimes such as vandalism, theft, the destruction of property, and arson. Most

animal rights extremists and ecoterrorists also eschew physical violence directly targeting people

or animals. Regardless, crimes committed by ecoterrorists and animal rights extremists have

caused millions of dollars in property damage, and some have involved the intimidation and

harassment of victims.64 These two types of extremism are often discussed together, because the

two broader radical movements from which they draw their philosophical underpinnings have

similar beliefs and overlapping membership.

The two movements—the Animal Liberation Front (ALF) and the Earth Liberation Front (ELF)—

have the greatest reach among animal rights extremists and ecoterrorists. The ALF and the ELF

are too diffuse to be called groups. Neither the ALF nor the ELF maintains formal rosters or

leadership structures, for example.65 However, each communicates a sense of shared identity and

attracts people who commit crimes in its name. They achieve this via “above-ground” wings.

The discussion lists the threats in the same order as found in Department of Justice, White Paper.

People the FBI or DOJ may characterize as animal rights extremists and ecoterrorists have tended to publicize their

activities online.

Department of Homeland Security, “Domestic Terrorism and Homegrown.”

For the purposes of this report, “ecoterrorists,” “eco-extremists,” and “environmental extremists” are synonymous.

These terms and “animal rights extremism” describe individuals engaged in criminal activity in the name of radical

environmental ideologies or animal rights. It is unclear why environmental extremists are frequently dubbed

“ecoterrorists” while animal rights extremists do not have a similar commonplace usage applied to them.

See Kevin R. Grubbs, “Saving Lives or Spreading Fear: The Terroristic Nature of Eco-Extremism,” Animal Law, vol.

16, no. 2 (2010), p. 353-57. Hereinafter: Grubbs, “Saving Lives.”

See Federal Bureau of Investigation, “Putting Intel to Work against ELF and ALF Terrorists,” June 30, 2008.

Hereinafter: FBI, “Putting Intel.”

Ibid.

Both the ALF and the ELF focus on criminal activity as central tenets of their philosophies or operational guidelines,

and the FBI emphasizes that criminal activity is a key element in the identities of these movements. See FBI, “Putting

Intel.”

Congressional Research Service

Domestic Terrorism: An Overview

Largely using websites, ALF and ELF supporters publish literature highlighting movement

philosophies, tactics, and accounts (press releases) of recent movement-related criminal activity.

Much of this involves protected speech and occurs in the public realm. Press releases allow

“underground” extremists to publicly claim responsibility for criminal activity in the name of

either movement while maintaining secrecy regarding the details of their operations. The ALF

and the ELF do not work alone. Members of other entities such as Stop Huntingdon Animal

Cruelty (SHAC) have committed crimes in the name of animal rights, for example.

Additional factors tangle our understanding of the ALF and the ELF. People can simultaneously

participate in both. This may partly be true because the movements are so amorphous. The two

movements also share similar agendas, and in 1993 they declared solidarity.66 All of this can play

out confusingly in the real world. For example, an individual can commit a crime and claim

responsibility for it online in the name of both the ALF and the ELF. One case especially

highlights intersections between the ALF and the ELF.

In the late 1990s and early 2000s, the FBI uncovered a network that, according to DOJ,

committed violent acts in the name of both the ALF and the ELF. The group included about 20

individuals and called itself “the Family.” It was reportedly responsible for at least 25 criminal

incidents totaling approximately $48 million in damages and disbanded at some point in 2001,

due to law enforcement pressure on the group. The Family was responsible for an arson attack in

1998 at the Vail Ski Resort. Eight simultaneous fires damaged radio towers, ski lift towers,

restaurants, and the ski patrol office at the Colorado site and totaled over $24 million in losses.67

Philosophical Underpinnings

Both the ALF and the ELF rely on and borrow from a number of philosophical underpinnings to

rationalize their beliefs and actions. These help forge a common identity among individuals in

each movement. These ideas are also key principles professed by more mainstream animal rights

or environmental activists engaged in legal protest.

The ALF: Animal Rights and Speciesism. The ALF’s moral code includes the belief that

animals possess basic inalienable rights such as life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and this

suggests that animals cannot be owned. According to the ALF, the U.S. legal system—which

describes animals as property—is corrupt, and there exists a “higher law than that created by and

for the corporate-state complex, a moral law that transcends the corrupt and biased statutes of the

US political system.”68 Simply put, the rights of one species do not trump the rights of others. To

suggest otherwise is to be prejudiced, according to animal rights adherents.

For the ALF and other animal rights supporters, the favoring of one species, particularly humans,

over others has a name: speciesism. For the ALF, speciesism is a “discriminatory belief system as

U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, “Statement of Carson Carroll, Deputy

Assistant Director, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives,” Eco-Terrorism Specifically Examining the

Earth Liberation Front and the Animal Liberation Front, 109th Cong., 1st sess., May 18, 2005, S. Hrg. 109-947

(Washington: GPO, 2007), p. 43. Hereinafter: Statement of Carson Carroll.

Federal Bureau of Investigation, “Operation Backfire: Help Find Four Eco-Terrorists,” November 19, 2008;

Department of Justice, “Eleven Defendants Indicted on Domestic Terrorism Charges,” press release, January 20, 2006.

Hereinafter: Department of Justice, “Eleven Defendants.” See also United States v. Joseph Dibee et al, Sentencing

Memorandum, CR 06-60069-AA, CR 06-60070-AA, CR 06-60071-AA, CR 06-60078-AA, CR 06-60079-AA, CR 0660080-AA, CR 06-60120-AA, CR-06-60122-AA, CR-06-60123-AA, CR-06-60124-AA, CR-06-60125-AA, CR60126-AA, U.S. District Court, District of Oregon, May 4, 2007, pp. 6, 8, 19, 20-21. Hereinafter: U.S. v. Dibee et al.

North American Animal Liberation Press Office, “History of the Animal Liberation Movement.” Hereinafter:

NAALPO, “History.”

Congressional Research Service

Domestic Terrorism: An Overview

ethically flawed and philosophically unfounded as sexism or racism, but far more murderous and

consequential in its implications.”69 Thus, the movement couches the theft or illegal release of

animals used in research or for economic gain as “liberation.” The ALF views the destruction of

laboratory infrastructure or tools as the elimination of items used to enslave species who have the

same rights as humans. Intimidation of scientists and employees of businesses tied to animal

research or testing is rationalized as confrontation with “oppressors” or those who, in the eyes of

movement adherents, abuse and murder animals.70

The ELF: An Ideological Mélange. Ecoterrorists are motivated by a mélange of environmental

philosophies. There is no single formula for what constitutes the ideological makeup of an ELF

follower, but several concepts likely play key roles in the movement. These are biocentrism, deep

ecology, social ecology, and green anarchism. Biocentrism argues for the equality of all

organisms.71 Deep ecology suggests that all species are part of “the larger super-organism that is

nature.”72 It criticizes industrialization and views modern human impact on the earth as negative

and hearkens back to small communities centered on subsistence agriculture.73 Social ecology

suggests that hierarchical human society leads to social inequalities and environmental harm.

Green anarchism ascribes environmental harm to civilization and domestication and embraces the

notion of “rewilding,” or rejecting civilization and returning to a hunter-gatherer state to preserve

one’s natural surroundings.74

Anarchist Extremists

According to the FBI, anarchist extremists commit crimes in the name of anarchist ideals.75 These

ideals include belief that

individual autonomy and collective equality are fundamental and necessary for a

functional, civilized society. [Anarchism] resists the existing hierarchical structure of

society that gives some people authority and control over others. [According to

anarchists] authority imbues power, and power always is used in illegitimate and selfserving ways by those who have it.76

Anarchist extremists as well as anarchists engaging in constitutionally protected activity can

oppose government, business, or social interests that they view as dangerous. As this suggests,

anarchists advocate some form of revolution that realigns authority in the societies they desire to

Steven Best and Anthony J. Nocella, II, “Behind the Mask: Uncovering the Animal Liberation Front,” in Terrorists

or Freedom Fighters? Reflections on the Liberation of Animals, ed. Steven Best and Anthony J. Nocella, II (New York:

Lantern Books, 2004), p. 24. Hereinafter: Best and Nocella, “Behind the Mask.” Best reportedly advises NAALPO, see

http://naalpo.posterous.com/our-task-new-essay-by-press-office-advisor-st. P. Michael Conn and James V. Parker, The

Animal Research War (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2008), p. xix. Hereinafter: Conn and Parker, The Animal. See

also NAALPO, “History” which excerpts Best and Nocella’s work.

NAALPO, “History.”

Stefan H. Leader and Peter Probst, “The Earth Liberation Front and Environmental Terrorism,” Terrorism and

Political Violence, vol. 15, no. 4 (Spring/Summer 2005), pp. 39-40. Hereinafter: Leader and Probst, “The Earth

Liberation Front.”

Conn and Parker, The Animal, xx.

Leader and Probst, “The Earth Liberation Front,” pp. 39-40.

Sean Parson, “Understanding the Ideology of the Earth Liberation Front,” Green Theory and Praxis: The Journal of

Ecopedagogy, vol. 4, no. 2 (2008), pp. 54-58.

Ibid.

Randy Borum and Chuck Tilby, “Anarchist Direct Actions: A Challenge for Law Enforcement,” Studies in Conflict

and Terrorism, vol. 28, no. 3, (2005), p. 202. Hereinafter: Borum and Tilby, “Anarchist Direct Action.”

Congressional Research Service

Domestic Terrorism: An Overview

transform. However, adherents cannot agree to a single means for attaining revolutionary

change.77

As one may assume, anarchist activity is decentralized. In fact, a basic, temporary organizational

structure—the affinity group—likely plays a larger role in shaping the work of U.S. anarchists

than any formal long-lasting entities or networks.78 Affinity groups are “autonomous militant

unit[s] generally made up of between five-to-twenty individuals who share a sense of the causes

worth defending and the types of actions they prefer to engage in. The decision-making process is

anarchist, that is to say, egalitarian, participatory, deliberative, and consensual.”79 An affinity

group often consists of a circle of friends. The friends coalesce around a specific objective and

break apart when they achieve their desired ends. Individual groups can band together in

“clusters” and clusters can coordinate their efforts, if need be.80 The efforts can be legal or illegal,

violent or nonviolent, covert or open. These structures have a long history among anarchists, but

other movements use them as well.81 Also, anarchists can engage in what they call “black bloc”

tactics. These involve secretive planning for public—often criminal—activity in which

participants, typically dressed in black, act en-masse.82 Adding to the sprawling nature of the

anarchist movement, some adherents also participate in the ALF and the ELF. These three

movements share general philosophical tenets such as opposition to globalization and

capitalism.83

“Antifa”

In the aftermath of the violence related to protests in Charlottesville, VA, on August 12, 2017, there has been media

attention devoted to the confrontational tactics of antifascist protesters known as “Antifa.” Antifa beliefs can dovetail

with the broad anti-government and anti-capitalist views that are part of anarchism.84 One observer has described

Antifa as, “a radical pan-leftist politics of social revolution applied to fighting the far right. Its adherents are

predominantly communists, socialists and anarchists who reject turning to the police or the state to halt the advance

of white supremacy.”85 Antifa beliefs appear to inspire autonomous groups to track the activities of neo-Nazis, and

most “anti-fascist organizing is nonviolent.”86 However, some Antifa protesters are willing to violently clash with

people publicly advocating what Antifa protesters would see as fascist views, particularly white supremacists.87 Antifa

protesters characterize such violence targeting people as defensive.88

Ibid., p. 203.

Borum and Tilby, “Anarchist Direct Action,” p. 207.

Francis Dupuis-Déri, “Anarchism and the Politics of Affinity Groups,” Anarchist Studies, vol. 18, no. 1 (2010),

p. 41. Hereinafter: Dupuis-Déri, “Anarchism.”

CrimethInc. Workers’ Collective, Recipes for Disaster: An Anarchist Cookbook, (Olympia, WA: CrimethInc.

Workers’ Collective, 2004), pp. 28-34. Hereinafter: Anarchist Cookbook.

Dupuis-Déri, “Anarchism,” p. 43.

Anarchist Cookbook, pp. 127-130.

Borum and Tilby, “Anarchist Direct Action,” p. 208.

“Anarchist Extremists: Antifa,” State of New Jersey Office of Homeland Security and Preparedness, June 12, 2017.

Hereinafter: “Anarchist Extremists: Antifa.” Breanna Cammeron, “Antifa: Left-Wing Militants on the Rise,” BBC

News, August 14, 2017.

Mark Bray, “Who Are the Antifa?” Washington Post, August 16, 2017.

Ibid.

See “Anarchist Extremists: Antifa.”

Sara Ganim and Chris Welch, “Unmasking the Leftist Antifa Movement,” CNN, August 20, 2017. They have also

engaged in property destruction.

Congressional Research Service

Domestic Terrorism: An Overview

The FBI has described anarchist extremists as typically being “event driven,” meaning

they show up at political conventions, economic and financial summits, environmental

meetings, and the like. They usually target symbols of Western civilization that they

perceive to be the root causes of all societal ills—i.e., financial corporations, government

institutions, multinational companies, and law enforcement agencies. They damage and

vandalize property, riot, set fires, and perpetrate small-scale bombings. Law enforcement

is also concerned about anarchist extremists who may be willing to use improvised

explosives devices or improvised incendiary devices.89

Anarchist extremists in the United States have been involved in illegal activity during mass

protests surrounding events such as the 1999 World Trade Organization Ministerial Conference in

Seattle, WA.

Anarchist extremists reportedly committed crimes during the 2008 Republican National

Convention in St. Paul, MN.90 To coordinate their protests during the convention, some anarchists

formed what they called the “RNC Welcoming Committee” (RNCWC).91 In September 2007, the

RNCWC developed a plan to broadly organize the activities of affinity groups intending to

disrupt the convention. Law enforcement infiltrated and undermined these efforts, arresting 800

people, including eight involved with the RNCWC.92 Initially, in Minnesota state court, the eight

“had been charged with felonies: first-degree damage to property and second-degree conspiracy

to riot. Prosecutors added a more serious charge of conspiracy to riot in furtherance of terrorism,

which was later dismissed.”93 Five of the eight pled guilty to gross misdemeanor charges in 2010.

The others had all of the charges they faced dismissed.94

On April 30, 2012, five men who reputedly had anarchist sympathies were arrested for

purportedly scheming to blow up a bridge near Cleveland, OH.95 One was convicted on charges

related to the plot. The four others pled guilty.96 The plot was apparently timed to coincide with

peaceful protest activity arranged by Occupy Cleveland, an offshoot of the Occupy Wall Street

movement. Occupy Cleveland representatives stated that the would-be bombers “were in no way

representing or acting on behalf of Occupy Cleveland.”97 An FBI sting operation led to the

Federal Bureau of Investigation, “Anarchist Extremism.”

Ibid. For information on reported anarchist criminal activity related to the 2008 Republican National Convention, see

Department of Justice, “Michigan Man Sentenced for Possessing Molotov Cocktails,” press release, March 10, 2009;

Department of Justice, “Texas Man Sentenced on Firearms Charges Connected to the Republican National

Convention,” press release, May 21, 2009; Department of Justice, “Austin, Texas Man Sentenced for Possessing

Molotov Cocktails During the Republican National Convention,” press release, May 14, 2009. For information on a

matter possibly related to the anarchist criminal activity at the 2008 convention, see James C. McKinley, Jr., “Anarchist

Ties Seen in ‘08 Bombing of Texas Governor’s Mansion,” New York Times, February 22, 2011.

For an archived version of the group’s website see http://web.archive.org/web/20080907081250/http://

www.nornc.org./.

Pat Pheifer, “Guilty Pleas Close Book on ‘08 Convention Protests,” Minneapolis-St. Paul Star Tribune, October 19,

2010. Hereinafter: Pheifer, “Guilty Pleas.” See also Fred Burton and Scott Stewart, “The Lessons of St. Paul,”

STRATFOR, September 10, 2008.

Pheifer, “Guilty Pleas.”

Ibid.

Department of Justice, “Five Men Arrested in Plot to Bomb Ohio Bridge,” press release, May 1, 2012. Hereinafter:

Department of Justice, “Five Men.” David Ariosto, “5 Arrested in Alleged Plot to Blow Up Cleveland-Area Bridge,”

CNN, May 1, 2012.

Kim Palmer, “‘Anarchist’ Convicted in Ohio Bridge Bomb Plot,” Reuters, June 13, 2013.

Henry J. Gomez, “Bridge Bomb Plot: Suspects Were Active in Occupy Cleveland, Even As Movement Slowed to a

Crawl,” Cleveland Plain Dealer, May 2, 2012.

Congressional Research Service

Domestic Terrorism: An Overview

quintet’s arrest.98 Purportedly, the group relied on an undercover FBI employee to supply them

with two inert bombs that the conspirators believed were functional.99

Criminal acts involving anarchist extremists do not have to be event-driven. For example, Eric G.

King pled guilty to using explosive devices to commit arson in a failed 2014 attempt to ignite a

fire at the Kansas City, MO, office of U.S. Representative Emanuel Cleaver II. The incident

occurred when the office was unoccupied, but King had posted violent commentary regarding

police to social media.100

DHS noted that anarchist extremists had set fires at urban development project sites in Vancouver,

Canada, and Seattle, WA, in 2013. Anarchist extremists are also suspected in a similar incident

that occurred in Grand Rapids, MI in 2011.101 These attacks followed instances of what DHS

characterized as “lower-level criminal activity or mischief involving anarchist or ‘antigentrification statements.’”102

In another case that was not event-driven, Joseph Konopka, the self-dubbed “Dr. Chaos,”

allegedly led a group of boys he called “The Realm of Chaos” in a series of crimes involving

vandalism to radio and cell phone towers in the late 1990s and early 2000s. In 2002, he was

arrested in Chicago for storing more than a pound of deadly cyanide powder in a passageway in a

Chicago Transit Authority subway tunnel.103 He had obtained the material (potassium cyanide and

sodium cyanide) from an abandoned warehouse.104 In 2002, Konopka pled guilty in federal court

to possessing chemical weapons, and in 2005 he pled guilty to 11 felonies, including conspiracy,

arson, creating counterfeit software, and interfering with computers in Wisconsin.105

White Supremacist Extremists

The term “white supremacist extremism” (WSE) describes people or groups who commit

criminal acts in the name of white supremacist ideology. According to media sources, in May

2017, FBI and DHS released a joint intelligence bulletin reputedly stating that white supremacists

“were responsible for 49 homicides in 26 attacks from 2000 to 2016 ... more than any other

domestic extremist movement.”106

Department of Justice, “Five Men.”

Ibid. Four of the conspirators pled guilty “to conspiracy to use weapons of mass destruction, attempted use of

weapons of mass destruction, and malicious use of an explosive device to destroy property used in interstate

commerce.” See Department of Justice, “Three Men Sentenced to Prison for Roles in Plot to Bomb Ohio Bridge,” press

release, November 20, 2012. A fifth was “convicted of conspiracy to use a weapon of mass destruction and other

charges.” See Kim Palmer, “‘Anarchist’ Convicted in Ohio Bridge Bomb Plot,” Reuters, June 13, 2013.

100

Tony Rizzo, “Man Who Threw Molotov Cocktails at Rep. Emanuel Cleaver’s KC Office Gets 10-Year Sentence,”

Kansas City Star, June 28, 2016; Department of Justice, “KC Man Pleads Guilty to Throwing Molotov Cocktails at

Congressional Office,” press release, March 3, 2016.

101

Department of Homeland Security, “Self-Identified Anarchist Extremists Target Urban ‘Gentrification’ Sites with

Arson,” July 23, 2013.

102

Ibid.

103

Juliet Williams, Federal appeals Court Overturns Dr. Chaos Conviction,” Associated Press, May 31, 2005; Mike

Robinson, “Federal Prosecutors Want ‘Dr. Chaos’ to Remain Locked Up,” Associated Press, March 13, 2002; Meg

Jones and Jesse Garza, “‘Anarchist’ Charged Over Cache of Cyanide,” Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, March 12, 2002.

104

“Man Pleads Guilty to Storing Cyanide,” Associated Press, November 21, 2002.

105

“Judge Sentences ‘Dr. Chaos’ to Prison for Damage to Wisconsin Power Systems, Associated Press, November 30,

2005.

106

Jana Winter, “FBI and DHS Warned of Growing Threat From White Supremacists Months Ago,” Foreign

Policy.com, August 14, 2017.

Congressional Research Service

Domestic Terrorism: An Overview

At its core, white supremacist ideology purports that the white race ranks above all others. WSE

draws on the constitutionally protected activities of a broad swath of racist hate-oriented groups

active in the United States ranging from the Ku Klux Klan to racist skinheads. Some of these

groups have elaborate organizational structures, dues-paying memberships, and media wings.

Additionally, many individuals espouse extremist beliefs without having formal membership in

any specific organization.

A large proportion of white supremacists dualistically divide the world between whites and all

other peoples who are seen as enemies.107 Particular animus is directed toward Jews and African

Americans. In fact, a common racist and revisionist historical refrain is that the civil rights

movement succeeded only because Jews orchestrated it behind the scenes.108

Scholars indicate that white supremacists believe in racial separation and that society

discriminates against them. To them, whites have lost “ground to other groups and ... extreme

measures are required to reverse the trend.”109 All of this has been encapsulated in a slogan

known as the “Fourteen Words”: “We must secure the existence of our race and a future for white

children.” This was coined by David Lane, a member of a violent terrorist group active in the

1980s. The Fourteen Words have been described as “the most popular white supremacist slogan

in the world.”110

Neo-Nazism and its obsession with Adolph Hitler and Nazi Germany is also a prominent

component of white supremacist extremism in the United States.111 The father of American neoNazism, George Lincoln Rockwell, became publicly active in the late 1950s. According to one

scholar, Rockwell laid down three concepts that have shaped neo-Nazism ever since. For his

followers, he reconfigured the racial notion of “white,” broadening it beyond “Aryan” to include

people of Southern and Eastern European descent. Additionally, Rockwell denied the Holocaust.

He also encouraged tying neo-Nazism to religion, and some of his followers took up the obscure

creed of Christian Identity.112

Conflict and Conspiracy

Aside from racial superiority, a dualistic view of the world, and neo-Nazism, at least two other

broad concepts shape white supremacy in the United States. They are the inevitability of violent

107

Chip Berlet and Stanislav Vysotsky, “Overview of U.S. White Supremacist Groups,” Journal of Political and

Military Sociology, vol. 34, no. 1 (Summer 2006), p. 13. Hereinafter: Berlet and Vysotsky, “Overview.”

108

Leonard Zeskind, Blood and Politics: The History of the White Nationalist Movement from the Margins to the

Mainstream (New York: Farrar, Straus, and Giroux, 2009), p. 40. Hereinafter: Zeskind, Blood and Politics.

109

Rory McVeigh, “Structured Ignorance and Organized Racism in the United States,” Social Forces, vol. 82, no. 3

(March 2004), pp. 898-899.

110

Anti-Defamation League, Guidebook, p. 16. Lane died in 2007 while serving 190 years in prison for his

involvement with a terrorist group named the Order. See “Founder of Terrorist Group Dies in Prison,” Terre Haute

Tribune-Star, May 29, 2007, http://tribstar.com/local/x1155692948/Founder-of-terrorist-group-dies-in-prison. Among

other writings, Lane also drafted an influential racist ideological tract titled The 88 Precepts.

111

Anti-Defamation League, Guidebook, p. 15.

112

Fredrick J. Simonelli, “The Neo-Nazi Movement,” Southern Poverty Law Center. See also Charles S. Clark, “An

American Nazi’s Rise and Fall,” American History, vol. 40, no. 6 (February 2006), pp. 60-66; Simonelli, “The

American Nazi Party,” Historian, vol. 57, no. 3 (Spring 1995), pp. 553-566. A follower assassinated Rockwell in 1967.

For information on Christian Identity, see Kevin Borgeson and Robin Valeri, Terrorism in America (Sudbury, MA:

Jones and Bartlett, 2009), pp. 47-72; Martin Durham, “Christian Identity and the Politics of Religion,” Totalitarian

Movements and Political Religions, vol. 9, no. 1 (March 2008), pp. 79-91; Tanya Telfair Sharpe, “The Identity

Christian Movement: Ideology of Domestic Terrorism,” Journal of Black Studies, vol. 30, no. 4 (March 2000), pp. 604623; Anti-Defamation League, “Christian Identity.”

Congressional Research Service

Domestic Terrorism: An Overview

conflict, and a belief that conspiracies hostile to white supremacy shape the existing world.113 It

can be said that WSE broadly shares these concepts with the militia movement (discussed below).

The FBI has stated that white supremacists “commonly anticipate” waging war against their

opponents.114 For example, the inevitability of RAHOWA—an acronym for “racial holy war”—is

a central tenet of the neo-Nazi Creativity Movement, which has its roots in the Church of the

Creator, a racist group founded by Ben Klassen in 1973.115 Klassen, who committed suicide in

1993, argued that whites had no choice but to wage war against non-whites.116 Likewise, some

white supremacists use racism to interpret apocalyptic imagery from Norse mythology embodied

in Odinism.117 Most Odinists are not racists, however.118

Conspiracism has been defined as “the idea that most major historic events have been shaped by

vast, long-term, secret conspiracies that benefit elite groups and individuals.”119 Conspiracy

theories are not the province of a particular movement or group. Regardless, conspiracy theories

can particularly shape the outlooks and actions of white supremacist extremists. Media sources

have stated that Richard Poplawski—convicted of shooting and killing three Pittsburgh police

officers in April 2009—believed that a Zionist conspiracy controlled government and major

corporations in the United States.120

As in Poplawski’s example, anti-Semitism plays a prominent role in the racist conspiracies of

many white supremacists.121 Many anti-Semites—as well as anti-government extremists—believe

in something they call the Zionist Occupied Government (ZOG).122 ZOG refers to the federal

government, which adherents contend is “controlled or manipulated by international Jewish

interests.”123 On its website, one WSE group sold versions of a video game titled “ZOG’s

Nightmare.” Gameplay involves shooting nonwhites while being chased by a police agency

113

Berlet and Vysotsky, “Overview,” pp. 12-13 highlights dualism, conspiracism, and apocalypticism as key themes.

The Bureau has noted that “warfare” is reflected in beliefs drawn from Christian Identity, the Creativity Movement,

neo-Nazism, and Odinism. See Federal Bureau of Investigation, White Supremacist Recruitment of Military Personnel

since 9/11, July 7, 2008, p. 4. Hereinafter: Federal Bureau of Investigation, White Supremacist.

115

After Klassen’s 1993 death, the Church of the Creator was revived in an altered form by Matt Hale. For more

information see Dobratz, “The Role,” p. 290; and Federal Bureau of Investigation, White Supremacist, p. 4.

116

Ben Klassen, “RAHOWA: The Fighting Slogan of the White Race,” Racial Loyalty, no. 32 (February 1986).

117

Federal Bureau of Investigation, White Supremacist, p. 4. Odinism has been defined as either a combination of old

Norse religion and Christianity or a belief system that draws exclusively on Nordic mythology. See Jonathan White,

“Political Eschatology: A Theology of Antigovernment Extremism,” The American Behavioral Scientist, vol. 44, no. 6,

(February 2001), p. 939.

118

Berlet and Vysotsky, “Overview,” p. 30.

119

Berlet and Vysotsky, “Overview,” p. 12. For more on conspiracy theories and terrorism see Jamie Bartlett and Carl

Miller, The Power of Unreason: Conspiracy Theories, Extremism, and Counter-Terrorism, Demos, London, August

29, 2010. Barlett and Miller (p. 24.) suggest that conspiracy theories “are one of a number of factors that can lead to

extremism, and can turn extremism to violence.”

120

Timothy McNulty, Paula Reed Ward and Sadie Gurman, “Jury Decides Poplawski Should Die for Killing 3

Officers,” Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, June 28, 2011. Hereinafter: McNulty et al., “Jury Decides.” See also AntiDefamation League, “Richard Poplawski: The Making of a Lone Wolf,” April 8, 2009. Hereinafter: Anti-Defamation

League, “Richard Poplawski.” Sean D. Hamill, “Man Accused in Pittsburgh Killings Voiced Racist Views Online,”

New York Times, April 7, 2009. Hereinafter: Hamill, “Man Accused.”

121

Berlet and Vysotsky, “Overview,” p. 13.

122

Also seen as “Zionist Occupation Government.”

123

Institute for Intergovernmental Research, Investigating Terrorism, p. 93; Mattias Gardell, Gods of the Blood: The

Pagan Revival and White Separatism (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2003), pp. 11, 54, 68-69. Hereinafter:

Gardell, Gods.

114

Congressional Research Service

Domestic Terrorism: An Overview

controlled by Jews.124 Racists explain all sorts of personal or social grievances by invoking

ZOG.125 One scholar has described ZOG as

an omnipresent and omnipotent cabal involving at its heart varying constellations of

Jews, Illuminati, Freemasons, plutocrats, and multinational corporations. It operates

through many social ‘front’ institutions, from the United Nations to Parent-Teacher

Associations.... ZOG can be used to explain not only the existence of affirmative action,

environmental pollution, and pornography but also why a certain individual made poor

grades in school, lost his job, or seems unable to find a partner.126

According to adherents, ZOG is said to control the media, arts, religion, science, and education.127

Loss of Prominent Leaders and Decline of their Groups

In the 1980s and 1990s, a small number of figures dominated white supremacist circles. They

were intimately linked to their own relatively cohesive organizations. By the early 2000s, these

groups fragmented as they lost their leaders.

Two particularly well-known white supremacist figures died in the early 2000s. William Pierce,

head of the National Alliance, died in 2002. Richard Butler, leader of Aryan Nations, died in

2004. Both Pierce and Butler articulated clear ideologies that attracted followers and drew upon

resources such as rural headquarters/compounds to sustain their organizations.128 By the early

2000s, the National Alliance even had a substantial revenue stream estimated at $1 million

annually generated from a publishing company and record labels it owned as well as dues.129 The

deaths of Butler and Pierce exacerbated the downfall of both organizations. The decline of these

groups also resulted from a number of other forces, such as infighting among members and

pressure from law enforcement and watchdog groups.130 Other groups have emerged since to

promote white supremacist ideas. Several movements espousing such views participated in the

August 2017 rally in Charlottesville, VA, that led to violence mentioned earlier.131

Two prominent white supremacist movements are discussed below.

National Socialist Movement (NSM)

One long-standing white supremacist organization active in the United States is the National

Socialist Movement (NSM). It has benefitted from the decline of other groups as well as new

leadership in the form of Jeff Schoep.132 The NSM also capitalized on the expansion of the

124

Anti-Defamation League, The National Socialist Movement.

Gardell, Gods, p. 68.

126

Ibid.

127

Ibid.

128

Freilich, Chermak, and Caspi, “Critical Events,” 511.

129

Ibid., pp. 512, 513.

130

Ibid., p. 516.

131

Groups such as Vanguard America (started in 2014), Identity Evropa (founded in 2016), and the Traditionalist

Worker Party (begun in 2015) reportedly participated. “Various Far-Right Extremist Groups Joined at Virginia Rally,”

Associated Press, August 15, 2017; Terence Cullen, “Vanguard America, Group Charlottesville Driver James Fields Jr.

Marched with, Has Increasingly Become a Neo-Nazi Voice,” New York Daily News, August 13, 2017; Hailey BransonPotts, “In Diverse California, a Young White Supremacist Seeks to Convert Fellow College Students,” Los Angeles

Times, December 7, 2016; Ralph Ellis, At Least 7 People Injured at Sacramento Rally, Authorities Say,” CNN, June 27,

2016.

132

Anti-Defamation League, American Stormtroopers: Inside the National Socialist Movement, (2008), p. 3.

(continued...)

125

Congressional Research Service

Domestic Terrorism: An Overview

Internet in the early 2000s. The group, which emerged in 1974, is a descendant of the American

Nazi Party, and until the 1990s and early 2000s “it operated only on the fringes of the neo-Nazi

movement.”133 As of 2008, the group had around 500 members and close associates throughout

the United States.134 The NSM is flexible about membership, allowing its members to also

participate in other white supremacist organizations.135

Individuals allegedly tied to the NSM at some point in their lives have run afoul of the law.



In Minnesota in April 2012, Joseph Benjamin Thomas was indicted on drugrelated charges, and Samuel James Johnson was indicted on weapons-related

charges. Purportedly the two were tied to NSM—at one point Johnson had

allegedly served as its leader in Minnesota. The duo had reportedly formed their

own white supremacist group, gathering weapons and ammunition and planning

to attack the government and other targets.136 In June 2012, Johnson pled guilty

to “one count of being a felon in possession of firearms.”137 In July 2012,

Thomas pled guilty to “possession with intent to distribute more than 50 grams of

high-purity methamphetamine.”138

William White, a onetime member of the NSM and founder of his own white

supremacist organization, has faced charges in several criminal cases. In

September 2014, he was found guilty on charges related to a December 2013

indictment that included “five counts of making threats in aid of extortion over

the Internet and one count of the unlawful use of identification information in

furtherance of those offenses.”139 He threatened a Florida judge, a state attorney,

and an FBI agent, with kidnapping, torture, rape, and murder. According to DOJ,

White included the families of these individuals in his threats. The officials that

White threatened had been involved in prosecuting suspects tied to the American

Front, a white supremacist organization in Florida. White apparently hoped that

his threats would somehow secure the release of the American Front suspects.140

In January 2011, White was convicted141 of soliciting violence online against the

jury foreman in U.S. v. Matthew Hale.142 In April 2011, a federal judge reversed

(...continued)

Hereinafter: Anti-Defamation League, American Stormtroopers.

133

Ibid.

134

Ibid.

135

Southern Poverty Law Center, “National Socialist Movement.”

136

Department of Justice, “Mendota Heights Man Indicted for Distributing Methamphetamine,” press release, April 27,

2012; Department of Justice, “Austin Felon Indicted for Possessing Firearms,” press release, April 27, 2012; Amy

Forliti, “Affidavit: 2 Men With Supremacist Ties Had Weapons,” Associated Press, April 27, 2012.

137

Department of Justice, “Austin Felon Pleads Guilty to Possessing an Assault Rifle,” press release, June 6, 2012.

138

Department of Justice, “Mendota Heights Man Pleads Guilty to Possessing Methamphetamine,” press release, July

11, 2012.

139

Department of Justice, “Neo-Nazi Sentenced for Sending Gruesome Threats to Florida Officials and Their

Families,” press release, November 21, 2014; Department of Justice, “White Supremacist Charged with Sending Online

Threatening Communications to a Florida Judge, State Attorney, and Task Force Agent,” press release, December 11,

2013.

140

Ibid.

141

Department of Justice, “Self-Proclaimed White Supremacist William White Convicted of Soliciting Violence

Against Hale Jury Foreman,” press release, January 5, 2011.

142

Matthew Hale was convicted of soliciting the murder of U.S. District Judge Joan Humphrey Lefkow. In the mid

1990s, Hale revived the Church of the Creator fortunes. He changed the organization’s name to the World Church of

(continued...)

Congressional Research Service

Domestic Terrorism: An Overview

White’s conviction. Upon appeal, the conviction was reinstated.143 In an

unrelated case, in December 2009, White was convicted of four counts of

communicating threats in interstate commerce and one count of witness

intimidation. One of the convictions for communicating threats in interstate

commerce was later reversed.144 The witness intimidation charges involved White

reportedly attempting to “delay or prevent the testimony” of African Americans

in a discrimination case.145 According to publicly available information, in 2005

and 2006 White was involved with NSM, for a time serving as its national

spokesman.146 His activity with NSM ceased after he had a falling out with

Schoep.147

Racist Skinheads

In the United States, racist skinheads have a legacy stretching back to the 1980s.148 However,

skinhead culture originated in the United Kingdom in the late 1960s and today has a global

reach.149 Since the early 2000s, the movement in the United States has been characterized by a

proliferation of regional groups or crews rather than a united core organization.150 In law

enforcement circles, racist skinheads have a reputation for violence. This is “reinforced by hatefilled white power music and literature.” “[T]hey foster [their reputed toughness] through their

(...continued)

the Creator, and according to a watchdog group, by 2002 it had more chapters in the United States than any other neoNazi organization. Judge Lefkow had originally ruled in favor of Hale in a trademark infringement case involving the

name “World Church of the Creator.” Her ruling was reversed on appeal, and as a result, she had to enforce the higher

court’s reversal. Via email and during a conversation, Hale discussed with his security chief the idea of killing Lefkow.

Hale did not know that his security chief was an FBI informant. In 2003, Hale was arrested for soliciting the murder of

Judge Lefkow, and this, as well as his subsequent conviction on charges related to the case, hastened a downturn in

fortune for his World Church of the Creator. Hale is serving a 40-year prison term. After another name change, the

group—currently known simply as the Creativity Movement—shows signs of revival under new leadership. See

Michael, Theology of Hate, pp. 120-133, 173-188; Chris Dettro, “Follow-Up File: White Supremacist Finds Quiet Life

in Prison,” The State Journal-Register, Springfield, Il, October 25, 2010; Federal Bureau of Investigation, “A Different

Breed of Terrorist,” June 6, 2004.

143

Department of Justice, “White Supremacist William White Sentenced to 42 Months in Prison for Soliciting

Violence Against Hale Jury Foreman,” press release, February 20, 2013; Laurence Hammack, “Judge Tosses William

A. White Verdict,” The Roanoke Times, April 20, 2011.

144

Department of Justice, “Roanoke, Virginia Neo-Nazi Sentenced for Threats, Witness Intimidation,” press release,

April 14, 2010.

145

Ibid. See also Laurence Hammack, “Former Neo-Nazi Leader Gets 3 More Months in Prison,” October 23, 2012.

146

Laurence Hammack, “White’s Life on Fringe Puts Him at Center of Storm,” The Roanoke Times, July 26, 2009.

147

Ibid; Southern Poverty Law Center, “Bill White,” 2011. For other cases involving individuals allegedly tied to

NSM, see Department of Justice, “Valley Man Enters Guilty Plea for Possession and Transport of an Improvised

Explosive Device,” press release, September 27, 2011; Department of Justice, “Valley Man Indicted for Possessing and

Transporting Improvised Explosive Devices,” press release, January 26, 2011, http://phoenix.fbi.gov/dojpressrel/

pressrel11/px012611.htm; Rudabeh Shahbazi, “Documents Show Apache Junction Man Planned To Take IEDs to the

Border,” ABC 15; Federal Bureau of Investigation, “Domestic Terrorism: Tip Leads to Sting, Prison for Plotter,”

November 29, 2006.

148

Serge F. Kovaleski, “American Skinheads: Fighting Minorities and Each Other,” Washington Post, January 16,

1996; Southern Poverty Law Center, Skinheads in America: Racists on the Rampage, p. 3. Hereinafter: Southern

Poverty Law Center, Skinheads.

149

Ibid.

150

Ibid., p. 13; Federal Bureau of Investigation, Rage and Racism, p. 8.

Congressional Research Service

Domestic Terrorism: An Overview

appearance (shaved heads or close-cropped hair, white power tattoos) and dress (bomber jackets,

‘braces’ (suspenders), steel-toed boots.)”151

Skinheads emerged as a non-racist movement among British working-class youth in the late

1960s. These early skinheads rejected the hippie lifestyle and embraced elements of Jamaican

culture, particularly reggae and ska music. As immigration from South Asia to the UK grew, some

white British skinheads embraced racism and neo-Nazism. This racist skinhead variant of the

subculture materialized in the U.S. Midwest and in Texas in the early 1980s.152

In the mid-1990s, many U.S.-based racist skinhead groups allied with one another to form the

Hammerskin Nation (HSN). HSN eventually developed chapters throughout the United States

and in Europe. It had its own annual meeting/concert called Hammerfest, ran a record label, and

had a publishing company. In the early 2000s, other groups such as the Outlaw Hammerskins,

Hoosier State Hammerskins, and Ohio State Skinheads challenged HSN for preeminence. These

groups saw HSN as “elitist.”153

In January 2010, the FBI released a bulletin that, among other things, emphasized that some racist

skinheads formed the most violent segment of WSE adherents.154 This supported the findings in a

2008 FBI assessment.155 Between 2007 and 2009, skinheads were involved in 36 of the 53 violent

incidents the FBI identified in the United States as being tied to WSE proponents.156 The Bureau

has stated that “violence is an integral part of the racist skinhead subculture.”157 Elements within

the fractious movement even target one another.158 These criminal acts are typically unrehearsed

and opportunistic, targeting nonwhites and “other religious and social minorities.”159

At least one exception involved greater levels of planning. One man was convicted and two

others pled guilty in a Connecticut case that involved the illegal sale of firearms and homemade

grenades. The scheme included multiple meetings between late 2008 and early 2010 to negotiate

the transactions, prepare the firearms, and assemble the grenades. The trio was tied to a skinhead

group known as Battalion 14 (originally called the Connecticut White Wolves). They sold the

weapons to a convicted felon working as an FBI cooperating witness. The informant posed as a

member of the Imperial Klans of America, a Ku Klux Klan organization. Two others in the case,

including the leader of Battalion 14 and a man not tied to the group, were acquitted of charges.160

151

Federal Bureau of Investigation, Rage and Racism, pp. 5-6.

Michael R. Ronczkowski, Terrorism and Organized Hate Crime: Intelligence Gathering, Analysis, and

Investigations, 2nd ed. (Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, Taylor and Francis Group, 2007), pp. 40-41. Hereinafter:

Ronczkowski, Terrorism. Southern Poverty Law Center, Skinheads, pp. 3-4.

153

Southern Poverty Law Center, Skinheads, p. 5.

154

Federal Bureau of Investigation, White Supremacist Extremist Violence Possibly Decreases But Racist Skinheads

Remain the Most Violent, January 28, 2010. Hereinafter: Federal Bureau of Investigation, White Supremacist Extremist

Violence.

155

Federal Bureau of Investigation, Rage and Racism: Skinhead Violence on the Far Right, December 10, 2008.

Hereinafter: Federal Bureau of Investigation, Rage and Racism.

156

Federal Bureau of Investigation, White Supremacist Extremist Violence, p. 4.

157

Federal Bureau of Investigation, Rage and Racism, p. 5.

158

Southern Poverty Law Center, Skinheads, pp. 5, 16.

159

Federal Bureau of Investigation, Rage and Racism, p. 5.

160

Department of Justice, “Milford Man Sentenced to 10 Years in Prison for Making Grenades and Selling Guns

Intended for White Supremacist Group,” press release, May 5, 2011, http://newhaven.fbi.gov/dojpressrel/pressrel11/

nh050511.htm; Michael P. Mayko, “Two Acquitted in White Wolves Conspiracy Case,” Connecticut Post, December

2, 2010; Michael P. Mayko, “White Wolves Called ‘Home Grown Terrorists,’” Connecticut Post, November 16, 2010;

Anti-Defamation League, “Connecticut White Supremacists Indicted on Firearms and Explosives Charges,” March 24,

(continued...)

152

Congressional Research Service

Domestic Terrorism: An Overview

Anti-Government Extremists

As mentioned above, DOJ considers both unauthorized militias and sovereign citizens as antigovernment extremists. Neither militia membership nor advocacy of sovereign citizen tenets

makes one a terrorist or a criminal. However, in some instances both militia members and

sovereign citizens have committed crimes driven in part by their ideologies.161

Militia Extremists

The militia movement became prominent in the 1990s as a collection of armed, paramilitary

groups formed to stave off what they perceived as intrusions of an invasive government.162

Central to this is a fear of firearm confiscation by a federal government thought to be out of

control. Some adherents also believe in anti-Semitic and racist ideologies.163 Regardless, most

militia members engage in constitutionally protected activity.

Militia groups typically coalesce around a specific leader. Groups can run training compounds

where they rehearse paramilitary tactics, practice their survival skills, and receive weapons

instruction and lessons in movement ideology. Some militia groups also maintain websites for

recruitment and fundraising.164 Extremists within the movement who run afoul of law

enforcement “tend to stockpile illegal weapons and ammunition, trying illegally to get their hands

on fully automatic firearms or attempting to convert weapons to fully automatic. They also try to

buy or manufacture improvised explosive devices.”165

Segments of the militia movement believe that the U.S. government is either run by some hidden

conspiracy or is an overreaching sham. Some see a “New World Order” controlling U.S.

institutions such as the media and the federal government. They contend that this is partly

fostered by international organizations such as the United Nations. From this perspective, these

organizations sap American sovereignty. Some militia supporters believe that agents of an unauthentic “Shadow Government” are interested in seizing lawfully owned firearms as part of a

plan to undermine democracy.166 Importantly, others in the militia movement hold that the federal

government has overstepped its constitutional bounds.167 One scholar has noted that some militia

(...continued)

2010. For another case allegedly involving racist skinheads, see Amy Pavuk and Henry Pierson Curtis, “Details

Emerge in Osceola Skinhead Race-War Case,” Orlando Sentinel, May 8, 2012.

161

The material in this section describes militia extremists and sovereign citizen extremists. On occasion more broadly

anti-government extremists engage in violence but defy easy categorization. For example, in 2014, broadly antigovernment extremists Jerad and Amanda Miller (husband and wife) shot and killed two Las Vegas, NV, Metropolitan

Police Department officers. Police shot and killed the couple. Mark Berman, Las Vegas Shooters Had Expressed AntiGovernment Views, Prepared for ‘Lengthy Gun Battle,’” Washington Post, June 9, 2014.

162

Institute for Intergovernmental Research, Investigating Terrorism and Criminal Extremism: Terms and Concepts,

Version 1.0, (Tallahassee, Florida: Institute for Intergovernmental Research, 2005), p. 49; Hereinafter: Institute for

Intergovernmental Research, Investigating Terrorism.

163

Arizona Counter-Terrorism Information Center, “Sovereign Citizens and Militia Information,” August 19, 2008,

p. 1.

164

Lane Crothers, “The Cultural Foundations of the Modern Militia Movement,” New Political Science, vol. 24, no. 2

(2002), p. 231. Hereinafter: Crothers, “The Cultural.”

165

Federal Bureau of Investigation, “Domestic Terrorism: Focus on Militia Extremism,” September 22, 2011.

166

Lane Crothers, Rage on the Right: The American Militia Movement from Ruby Ridge to Homeland Security

(Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield, 2003), p. 57. Hereinafter: Crothers, Rage on the Right.

167

Crothers, “The Cultural,” pp. 226-228.

Congressional Research Service

Domestic Terrorism: An Overview

members assert that they have “the right to organize, purchase and use firearms, and enforce the

law against agents of the government who behave unconstitutionally.”168

A small minority of Americans who held anti-government fears formed militias largely in

response to two incidents in the early 1990s. These were confrontations between federal law

enforcement and private citizens at Ruby Ridge, ID, and at a site near Waco, TX.169 Both involved

warrants related to firearms violations.



In August 1992, Randy Weaver and his family were engaged in an 11-day

standoff with federal law enforcement agents. Randy Weaver had failed to appear

in court on firearms-related charges in 1991. Subsequently, an unsuccessful

operation to arrest Weaver led to the death of his 14-year-old son and a U.S.

Marshal. It also precipitated the standoff. During the standoff, Weaver and a

friend were shot and wounded. An FBI sniper also shot and killed Weaver’s wife,

Vicki.170 Weaver was eventually found guilty of failing to appear in court on the

gun charges that played a role in the standoff. In October 1993, he was sentenced

to 18 months in jail and a $10,000 fine. In 1995, Weaver received a $3.1 million

settlement in a wrongful death suit filed against the U.S. government.171 The

events at Ruby Ridge helped precipitate the militia movement, whose members

tend to view Randy Weaver as a hero and demonize the federal government.172

The militia movement also emerged because of the 51-day standoff between

federal law enforcement and a religious sect named the Branch Davidians near

Waco.173 On February 28, 1993, an unsuccessful attempt by Bureau of Alcohol

Tobacco Firearms and Explosives (ATF) agents to arrest the sect’s leader, David

Koresh, initiated the events near Waco. He was wanted on suspicion of federal

firearms and explosives violations.174 Four ATF agents and six Branch Davidians

died in a gunfight during the operation.175 Protracted discussions followed

between federal negotiators and Koresh. These failed. On April 19, federal agents

assaulted the Davidian compound, which caught on fire. At least 75 Branch

Davidians perished in the assault.176

168

Ibid., p. 228.

Ibid., pp. 230-231. See also Michael Barkun, “Appropriated Martyrs: The Branch Davidians and the Radical Right,”

Terrorism and Political Violence, vol. 19, no. 1 (2007), p. 120. Hereinafter: Barkun, “Appropriated Martyrs.” See also

Steven M. Chermak, Searching for a Demon: The Media Construction of the Militia Movement, (Boston: Northeastern

University Press, 2002).

170

Stuart A. Wright, Patriots, Politics, and the Oklahoma City Bombing (New York: Cambridge University Press,

2007), pp. 142-148. Hereinafter: Wright, Patriots. Weaver has been described as a survivalist who believed in the

Christian Identity religion. See Barkun “Appropriated Martyrs,” p. 118. He has also been described as holding white

supremacist beliefs and was not a militia member. See Crothers, Rage on the Right, pp. 78-79.

171

Crothers, Rage on the Right, p. 90.

172

Wright, Patriots, pp. 149-152; Crothers, Rage on the Right, pp. 92-97; Barkun, “Appropriated Martyrs,” pp. 120121.

173

Crothers, Rage on the Right, p. 104.

174

Department of Justice, Report to the Deputy Attorney General on the Events at Waco, Texas, October 8, 1993. The

Branch Davidian sect emerged from the Seventh-Day Adventist Church and was formed in 1929. The two severed

official ties with one another in 1934. David Koresh was not a militia member. See Crothers, Rage on the Right, pp.

100-101.

175

Crothers, Rage on the Right, p. 105.

176

Crothers, Rage on the Right, p. 110.

169

Congressional Research Service

Domestic Terrorism: An Overview

If the incidents involving the Weavers and the Branch Davidians helped form the militia

movement, Timothy McVeigh’s bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma

City on April 19, 1995, helped usher in a temporary decline.177 In the bombing’s aftermath, militia

groups received greater law enforcement scrutiny.178 The bombing claimed 168 lives, and until

9/11 was the largest single act of terrorism on U.S. soil. The militia movement declined after the

bombing.179 Although McVeigh’s bombing cannot fully account for a dip in militia activity, it

affected the movement by causing some groups to temper their rhetoric while others grew more

extreme, and militias became more marginalized.180

Observers have noted that the militia movement has experienced resurgence in the last decade,

likely driven by growing antipathy toward the federal government.181 A few individuals still draw

inspiration from McVeigh. Jerry Drake Varnell was arrested in August 2017 after he allegedly

intended to damage or destroy a bank in downtown Oklahoma City by reportedly attempting to

detonate what he thought was a bomb in a van. But the inert explosive device was based on

materials provided by an undercover FBI agent as part of an investigation that nabbed Varnell,

who allegedly was inspired by the Timothy McVeigh’s 1995 bombing. Varnell purportedly hewed

to militia extremist beliefs and, according to investigators, expressed an interest in founding a

small militia.182

Two widely reported incidents in recent years have attracted militia and other anti-government

extremists.



In 2014, multiple individuals led by Cliven Bundy engaged in an armed standoff

with police officials at Bundy’s ranch in Bunkerville, NV, preventing the

execution of a court order related to a dispute involving the grazing of cattle on

federal lands.183 One individual involved was sentenced to 68 years in prison for

a variety of crimes related to his involvement in the standoff.184

For 41 days in late 2015 and early 2016, Ammon and Ryan Bundy (sons of

Cliven Bundy) led numerous individuals in armed occupation of federal property

at the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge in Oregon. Although the ringleaders of

the broader occupation—including the Bundy brothers—were acquitted in

177

McVeigh was not a militia member, but he interacted with others who were.

Devlin Barett and Eileen Sullivan, “FBI Sees Little Chance of Copycat Militia Plots,” Associated Press, March 31,

2010.

179

Andrew Wolfson, “The Execution: Militias Dwindle Since Oklahoma City Bombing,” USA Today, June 20, 2001.

180

Crothers, Rage on the Right, p. 138, 147.

181

Max Strasser, “Fed Up with the Feds,” Newsweek, May 2, 2014.

182

Eli Watkins and Shimon Prokupecz, “FBI Arrests Man in Oklahoma Bombing Sting,” CNN, August 14, 2017;

United States v. Jerry Drake Varnell, criminal complaint, U.S. District Court, Western District of Oklahoma, August

13, 2017.

183

“Federal Authorities Indict 19 in 2014 Range Standoff in Nevada,” Associated Press, March 4, 2016; Department of

Justice, “Fourteen Additional Defendants Charged for Felony Crimes Related to 2014 Standoff in Nevada,” press

release, March 3, 2016; United States v. Cliven Bundy, et al. superseding indictment, United States District Court,

District of Nevada, March 2, 2016. This standoff is included in this memo’s list of domestic terrorist/extremist

incidents, because the superseding indictment in the federal criminal case related to the standoff describes it as “a

massive armed assault against federal law enforcement officers.”

184

The charges included assault on a federal officer; threatening a federal law enforcement officer; obstruction of the

due administration of justice; interference with interstate commerce by extortion; interstate travel in aid of extortion;

and three counts of use and carry of a firearm in relation to a crime of violence. See Department of Justice, “Phoenix

Man Sentenced to Over 68 Years in Prison for Threat and Assault of Federal Law Enforcement and Other Charges

Related to 2014 Armed Standoff in Bunkerville,” press release, July 26, 2017.

178

Congressional Research Service

Domestic Terrorism: An Overview

federal court of many of the most serious charges levied against them, a violent

incident occurred during the occupation. Oregon State Police officers fatally shot

LaVoy Finicum. The shooting occurred after Finicum reportedly drove a pickup

truck at high speed toward a police roadblock, reputedly endangering officers

before careening into a nearby snowbank. According to law enforcement

officials, Finicum subsequently left the vehicle, refusing to comply with police

commands, and reached for a gun in his pocket before he was shot to death.185 In

the fallout related to the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge takeover, Cliven

Bundy was arrested on charges tied to the 2014 Bunkerville standoff.

Several other examples highlight how some militia adherents have reportedly engaged in criminal

activity since 9/11.



Purportedly, Curtis Allen, Gavin Wright, and Patrick Eugene Stein conspired to

detonate explosives at an apartment complex in Garden City, KS. Prosecutors

allege Allen, Wright, and Stein hoped to target Somali immigrants living in the

complex.186 The trio was part of a small militia-style group dubbed the Crusaders.

Underscoring the violent viewpoints the trio reputedly held, a larger militia

organization in Kansas reportedly rejected Wright and Stein for membership

because the larger group perceived the duo as too extreme.187

In November 2011, the FBI arrested four retirees, Samuel J. Crump, Ray H.

Adams, Dan Roberts, and Frederick W. Thomas, who allegedly formed a fringe

militia group and planned violent attacks on government officials. The group,

based in northern Georgia, purportedly had ties to an unnamed militia

organization. According to DOJ, the quartet “discussed multiple criminal

activities, ranging from murder; theft; manufacturing and using toxic agents; and

assassinations in an effort to undermine federal and state government and to

advance their interests.”188 Between June and November 2011, Roberts and

Thomas met with an FBI undercover agent to negotiate the purchase of matériel

for the plot: “a silencer for a rifle and conversion parts to make a fully automatic

rifle, as well as explosives.”189 In October, plotters reportedly discussed making

ricin, a deadly poison derived from castor beans.190 In April 2012, Roberts and

Thomas pled guilty to conspiring to obtain an unregistered explosive device and

185

Patrik Jonsson, “After the Bundy Acquittal, Some Surprising Lessons of the Malheur Occupation,” Christian

Science Monitor, October 29, 2016; Hal Bernton, “Jury Acquits Leaders of Malheur Wildlife-Refuge Standoff,” Seattle

Times, October, 27, 2016. A second trial led to additional verdicts, see Department of Justice, “Jury Delivers Verdict in

Second Oregon Standoff Trial,” press release, March 10, 2017. Greg Botelho and Michael Martinez, “Shooting Death

of LaVoy Finicum Justified, Necessary, Prosecutor Says,” CNN, March 8, 2016. In 2017, an FBI agent involved in the

Finicum shooting was federally indicted for his allegedly attempting to cover up his own involvement in the shooting.

See Maxine Bernstein, “LaVoy Finicum Shooting: Indictment of Agent ‘devastating’ for FBI,” The Oregonian, June

29, 2017.

186

Department of Justice, “Three Kansas Men Charged With Plotting a Bombing Attack Targeting the Local Somali

Immigrant Community,” press release, October 14, 2016.

187

Judy L. Thomas, “Kansas Militia Says It Spurned Alleged Terrorists Arrested in Garden City Case,” Kansas City

Star, November 2, 2016.

188

Department of Justice, “North Georgia Men Arrested, Charged in Plots to Purchase Explosives, Silencer and to

Manufacture a Biological Toxin,” press release, November 1, 2011.

189

Ibid.

190

Craig Schneider, “Documents: Men with Castor Beans, Guns Worried about Getting Caught,” Atlanta JournalConstitution, November 6, 2011.

Congressional Research Service

Domestic Terrorism: An Overview



silencer.191 Crump and Adams were found guilty of “conspiring to make ricin to

be used as a weapon in January 2014. Also, they were found guilty of one count

each of possessing a biological toxin for use as a weapon.” Adams was acquitted

of “attempting to develop, produce and possess a biological toxin.”192

In June 2012, three individuals were found guilty in Anchorage, AK, of

conspiracy and firearms charges related to a scheme purportedly led by Francis

“Schaeffer” Cox.193 He and his followers allegedly plotted “a potential retaliatory

response to any attempt by law enforcement to arrest Cox, who had an

outstanding bench warrant for not attending a trial over a misdemeanor weapons

charge.”194 They were members of the Alaska Peacemaker’s Militia based in

Fairbanks, AK, and also held sovereign citizen beliefs. The plotters supposedly

codenamed their plan “241 (two for one),” because they reputedly intended to

kill two government officials for every militia member killed in the operation.195

The above activities are not necessarily indicative of trends toward violence in the larger militia

movement, and in one prominent case, DOJ failed to convince the presiding judge of serious

charges revolving around a purported violent plot. In March 2012, a federal judge acquitted

members of a Michigan Militia group known as the Hutaree on charges of seditious conspiracy or

rebellion against the United States and conspiring to use weapons of mass destruction. The judge

also cleared the accused Hutaree members of weapons crimes related to the conspiracies.196

The case garnered headlines in March 2010, when nine Hutaree members were indicted for

allegedly preparing to violently confront U.S. law enforcement.197 Their supposed plotting

included the murder of a local law enforcement officer and an attack on fellow officers who

gathered in Michigan for the funeral procession. According to DOJ, the Hutaree discussed the use

of explosives against the funeral procession.198 Audio recordings by an undercover FBI agent of

reputed Hutaree leader David Brian Stone capture him discussing the New World Order and how,

“it’s time to strike and take our nation back so we will be free of tyranny.... The war will come

191

Department of Justice, “North Georgia Men Plead Guilty to Plot to Purchase Explosives and a Silencer,” press

release, April 10, 2012.

192

Kate Brumback, “Jury Finds 2 Georgia Men Guilty in Ricin Plot,” Associated Press, January 17, 2014.

193

Department of Justice, “Guilty Verdicts in USA v. Cox, Barney, and Vernon,” press release, June 19, 2012.

194

Department of Justice, “Superseding Indictment Returned by Federal Grand Jury Against Fairbanks-Area Men for

Conspiracy to Kill Federal Officers,” press release, January 23, 2012; Sam Friedman, “Details Emerge in Alleged Plot

to Kill Alaska State Troopers, Judge,” Fairbanks Daily News-Miner, March 3, 2011. Cox has also been described as a

sovereign citizen (discussed below). See Sam Friedman, “The Schaeffer Cox File: The Trail of a Young Man,”

Fairbanks Daily News-Miner, April 10, 2011. For a related case see Department of Justice, “Salcha Couple Pleads

Guilty to Conspiracy to Murder Federal Officials,” press release, August 27, 2012; Department of Justice, “Couple

Charged with Conspiracy to Murder Judge and Federal Firearms Crimes, Two Others Indicted for Conspiracy to

Possess Destructive Devices and Illegal Weapons,” press release, March 17, 2011.

195

For examples of other militia adherents involved in crime, see Meghann M. Cuniff, “Health Problems Reduce

Militia Leader’s Sentence,” The Spokesman-Review, August 11, 2011; David Cole, “Militia Member Sentenced on

Federal Firearms and Explosives Charges,” Coeur d’Alene Press, August 9, 2011; Federal Bureau of Investigation,

“Preventing Terrorist Attacks on U.S. Soil: The Case of the Wrong Package Falling into the Right Hands,” April 9,

2004; Scott Gold, Case Yields Chilling Signs of Domestic Terror Plot,” Los Angeles Times, January 7, 2004.

196

Ed White, “Michigan Militia Members Cleared of Conspiracy,” Associated Press, March 27, 2012,

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/critical-charges-dropped-michigan-militia-16013255?singlePage=

true#.T3MB5kd_lLc. Hereinafter: White, “Michigan Militia.”

197

Department of Justice, “Nine Members of a Militia Group Charged with Seditious Conspiracy and Related

Charges,” press release, March 29, 2010.

198

Ibid.

Congressional Research Service

Domestic Terrorism: An Overview

whether we are ready or not.”199 According to DOJ, the group had a hit list that included federal

judges, among others.200 However, during the trial an Assistant U.S. Attorney acknowledged that

the Hutaree had not formed a “specific plan” to attack government targets.201 U.S. District Judge

Victoria Roberts stated that, “The court is aware that protected speech and mere words can be

sufficient to show a conspiracy. In this case, however, they do not rise to that level.”202 Three

Hutaree members pled guilty to firearms charges.203

Sovereign Citizen Movement

The FBI defines the sovereign citizen movement as “anti-government,” involving people “who

believe that even though they physically reside in this country, they are separate or ‘sovereign’

from the United States. As a result, they do not accept any government authority, including

courts, taxing entities, motor vehicle departments, or law enforcement.”204 However, simply

holding these views is not a criminal act, and numerous movement adherents solely exercise their

beliefs via constitutionally protected activities.

The ideas behind the movement originated during the 1970s with a group known as the Posse

Comitatus and enjoyed some popularity in extremist circles during the 1980s and 1990s.205 Early

on, the movement featured white supremacist elements, but this has not kept some African

Americans from subscribing to its ideals in recent years.206 In the 1990s, the movement attracted

250,000 followers and was marked by the FBI’s standoff with a group known as the Montana

Freemen that lasted 81 days.207 Estimates from 2011 suggested a membership of 300,000.208

199

Corey Williams and Jeff Karoub, “Prosecutor: Undercover FBI Agent Infiltrated Militia,” Associated Press, March

31, 2010.

200

Dan Harris, Emily Friedman, and Tahman Bradley, “Undercover Agent Key Witness Against Hutaree Militia

Members,” ABC News, April 1, 2010, http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/undercover-agent-credited-hutaree-militia-bust/

story?id=10257584.

201

Robert Snell and Christine Ferretti, “Key Charges Dropped Against Hutaree Militia,” Detroit News, March 28,

2011.

202

White, “Michigan Militia.”

203

See Department of Justice, “Members of the Hutaree Militia Plead Guilty to Weapons Charges,” March 29, 2012;

Matthew Dolan, “Defendant in Michigan Militia Case Changes Plea to Guilty,” press release, December 6, 2011,

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204083204577080630555077796.html?mod=googlenews_wsj. When

the Hutaree suspects were arrested in the case, some militia members in Michigan did not support the group’s alleged

scheming. For example, a member of another militia group in Michigan provided information to authorities regarding

the whereabouts of a fugitive Hutaree militia member. See Kirk Johnson, “Militia Draws Distinctions Between

Groups,” New York Times, March 31, 2010. Also, a militia leader from Michigan has said that the Hutaree case,

“caused a rift in the militia movement about whether this is the sort of group we want to rally behind or if what they

were doing was outside the scope of what’s acceptable.” See Robert Snell, “Militias Split over Defending Hutaree,”

Detroit News, March 31, 2011.

204

Federal Bureau of Investigation, “Domestic Terrorism: The Sovereign Citizen Movement,” April 13, 2010.

Hereinafter: Federal Bureau of Investigation, “Sovereign Citizen.”

205

J.M. Berger, “Without Prejudice: What Sovereign Citizens Believe,” George Washington University Program on

Extremism, June 2016.

206

Sarah Netter, “Anti-Government Sovereign Citizens Taking Foreclosed Homes Using Phony Deeds, Authorities

Say,” ABC News, August 23, 2010, http://abcnews.go.com/US/georgia-battling-sovereign-citizens-squattingforeclosed-homes/story?id=11445382. See Leah Nelson, “Sovereigns in Black,” Intelligence Report, Southern Poverty

Law Center, no. 143 (Fall 2011).

207

Patrik Jonsson, “‘Sovereign citizens’: Is Jared Loughner a sign of revived extremist threat?” Christian Science

Monitor, March 9, 2011.

208

Ibid.

Congressional Research Service

Domestic Terrorism: An Overview

For the most part, the sovereign citizen movement is diffuse and includes few organized

groups.209 The FBI suggests that sovereigns “operate as individuals without established leadership

and only come together in loosely affiliated groups to train, help each other with paperwork

[critical to some of their schemes], or socialize and talk about their ideology.”210 The movement

involves leaders described as “gurus” who proselytize online, in print publications, or via inperson seminars. These gurus rouse followers into believing a conspiracy theory in which the

legitimate federal government has been replaced by a government designed to take away the

rights of ordinary citizens.211 This shares the same broad interplay between concepts of legitimate

and illegitimate rule seen in the New World Order and WSE theories about ZOG. Gurus can also

promote illegal techniques that individuals can use to supposedly cut their ties to the federal

government or avoid its reach, particularly when it comes to taxation.212

Sovereign citizens reject the legitimacy of much of the U.S. legal system.213 Many believe that

the 14th Amendment “shifted the nation from its original common-law roots with states’ rights to

a federal corporation that legally enslaved everyone.”214 According to movement members, the

amendment ushered in an illegitimate federal government by supposedly abrogating individual

rights and replacing them with a system that “grant[ed] privileges through contracts such as

marriage and driver’s licenses, gun permits, and property codes.”215

By ignoring all sorts of laws, avoiding taxes, disregarding permit requirements, and destroying

government-issued identification documents, some sovereign citizens have tried to cut formal ties

with what they perceive as an illegitimate regime.216 Sovereigns have filed court documents

stating that they are not U.S. citizens.217 They have also created bogus financial documents to

harass or defraud their enemies. (For more information, see the “Paper Terrorism”: Liens,

Frivolous Lawsuits, and Tax Schemes” section in this report).

Sovereign citizens have in some instances created fictitious entities and used fake currency,

passports, license plates, and driver licenses. In 2009, a federal jury found three men guilty of

209

One sovereign citizens group is the “Republic for the united States of America” (RuSA) which is based in Alabama.

RuSA is a successor to a group known as the Guardians of the Free Republics (GFR), which in 2010 mailed letters to

the governors of all 50 U.S. states urging them to leave office. See Southern Poverty Law Center, “Sovereign

President,” Intelligence Report, Southern Poverty Law Center, no. 143 (Fall 2011). In March 2013, the group’s selfproclaimed president was convicted of “conspiracy to defraud the United States, attempting to pay taxes with fictitious

financial instruments, attempting to obstruct and impede the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), failing to file a 2009

federal income tax return, and falsely testifying under oath in a bankruptcy proceeding.” See Department of Justice,

“Self-Proclaimed President of Sovereign Citizen Nation Convicted in Alabama of Federal Tax Crimes,” press release,

March 25, 2013.

210

Federal Bureau of Investigation, Counterterrorism Analysis Section, “Sovereign Citizens: A Growing Domestic

Threat to Law Enforcement,” FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, (September 2011). Hereinafter: FBI Counterterrorism

Analysis Section, “Sovereign Citizens.”

211

Anti-Defamation League, The Lawless Ones: The Resurgence of the Sovereign Citizen Movement, August 9, 2010,

pp. 2-6. Hereinafter: Anti-Defamation League, The Lawless.

212

Ibid., p. 6.

213

However, this reportedly does not keep some sovereign citizen extremists from cashing government paychecks. See

J.J. McNabb, “Working for the Man: Anti-Government Extremists Who Cash Government Paychecks,” Forbes, March

5, 2012.

214

Tom Morton, “Sovereign Citizens Renounce First Sentence of 14th Amendment,” Casper Star-Tribune, April 17,

2011, http://trib.com/news/local/casper/article_a5d0f966-7ed0-549f-a066-b1b2c91f9489.html.

215

Ibid.

216

Anti-Defamation League, The Lawless, pp. 4-5.

217

Lance Griffin, “‘Sovereigns’ Gain Attention of Law Enforcement,” Dothan Eagle, May 21, 2011.

Congressional Research Service

Domestic Terrorism: An Overview

conspiring to use and sell fraudulent diplomatic credentials and license plates that they believed

allowed “their customers [to] enjoy diplomatic immunity and [to] no longer ... pay taxes or be

subject to being stopped, detained, or arrested by law enforcement personnel.”218 In 2003, Ronald

K. Delorme developed the Pembina Nation Little Shell Band of North America219 into a sovereign

citizen group.220 It is a sham Native American tribe that anyone can join to try and avoid taxes

and government-imposed costs, such as auto registration fees. For example, news reports indicate

that in June 2010, a sheriff’s deputy in Florida pulled over John McCombs when the law

enforcement official noticed a Pembina Nation Little Shell license plate on the motorcycle

McCombs was driving. According to publicly available sources, McCombs presented a fraudulent

letter of diplomatic immunity and an invalid Pembina Nation Little Shell vehicle registration.221

Some sovereign citizen fraud appears to be motivated by economic opportunism rather than

ideology.222 This includes “pyramid schemes, other investment schemes, bogus trust scams, real

estate fraud, and various types of tax frauds [as well as] more esoteric scams ... ranging from

immigration fraud to malpractice insurance fraud.”223 In November 2011, husband and wife

Monty and Patricia Ervin were convicted in federal court of conspiring to defraud the United

States as well as three counts of tax evasion. In addition, the federal jury convicted Patricia of

structuring transactions to avoid bank reporting requirements.224 The couple allegedly had not

filed federal income tax returns between 2000 and 2008, denied their U.S. citizenship, and

dubbed themselves “sovereign” when the IRS investigated.225 The Ervins earned more than $9

million from investment properties they owned.226 A group of self-proclaimed sovereign citizens

in North Georgia was indicted in March 2011 for using sovereign schemes to allegedly steal

millions of dollars worth of real estate.227

Some avowed sovereign citizens have been involved in violent altercations with law enforcement

officers:



In June 2016, Gavin Long shot and killed three police officers and wounded three

others in Baton Rouge, LA, before police killed him. He had articulated

sovereign citizen views online.228

In May 2010, two self-professed sovereign citizens were involved in a violent

confrontation with West Memphis, TN, police officers. During a traffic stop, Joe

Kane fired an AK-47 assault rifle and killed two officers. Kane and his father

218

Department of Justice, “Jury Convicts Three Men of Conspiracy To Use Fake Diplomatic Identification,” press

release, August 31, 2009.

219

The group is not a federally recognized tribe.

220

Anti-Defamation League, The Lawless; Chris Gerbasi, “Tribal Claims Causing Charlotte Controversy,” Sarasota

Herald Tribune, July 25, 2010; “Punta Gorda Man Arrested for Driving with Pembina Nation Plate,” WINK News, June

1, 2010.

221

Ibid.

222

For a discussion of redemption as a scam, see Federal Bureau of Investigation, Common Fraud Schemes,

http://www.fbi.gov/scams-safety/fraud.

223

Anti-Defamation League, The Lawless, p. 24.

224

Department of Justice, “Self-Proclaimed ‘Governor’ of Alabama and Wife Convicted of Tax Fraud,” press release,

November 4, 2011. Hereinafter: Department of Justice, “Self-Proclaimed.”

225

Ibid; United States v. Patricia Ervin and Monty Ervin, Superseding Indictment, 1:11-CR-07-MHT, District Court,

Middle District of Alabama, February 17, 2011.

226

Department of Justice, “Self-Proclaimed.”

227

Megan Matteucci, “12 ‘sovereign citizens’ indicted,” Atlanta Journal-Constitution, March 15, 2011.

228

Joshua Berlinger, “Gavin Long: Who is Baton Rouge Cop Killer?” CNN, August 4, 2016.

Congressional Research Service

Domestic Terrorism: An Overview

Jerry fled the scene. Law enforcement sighted their vehicle in a nearby parking

lot 90 minutes later. The duo died in the ensuing shootout, which also wounded

two more officers.229 The FBI had investigated Jerry Kane five years before the

murders because he was allegedly traversing the United States peddling what the

FBI termed a “debt elimination scheme.”230

In June 2012, the FBI issued a bulletin suggesting that some sovereign extremists might move

away from more spontaneous violence simply in reaction to encounters with police and are

potentially preparing for conflict in advance, “making more specific plans to interfere with state

and local law enforcement officers during traffic stops and, in some cases, intentionally initiating

contact with law enforcement.”231 In August 2013, authorities in Las Vegas, NV, arrested two

reputed Sovereigns, David Allen Brutsche and Devon Campbell Newman, after a local

investigation uncovered the duo’s purported schemes to kidnap and kill police officers.

Reportedly, the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department ran an undercover investigation to nab

the two after they encountered Brutsche in what has been characterized as a series of vehicle

stops during which “Brutsche would espouse his Sovereign Citizen beliefs that he wasn’t bound

by the law Metro officers were enforcing.”232 Brutsche pled guilty to felony kidnapping

conspiracy in February 2014 after “prosecutors abandoned the two most serious charges—

conspiracy to murder and attempted armed kidnapping.”233

Other cases have garnered attention. For example, in July 2011 James M. Tesi allegedly shot at a

local police officer trying to arrest him near Fort Worth, TX. Tesi was reportedly wounded in the

altercation. Outstanding “arrest warrants for speeding, driving without a license in possession,

and failure to appear” prompted the attempted apprehension.234 Court documents described in

news reporting noted that Tesi linked himself to a sovereign citizen group.235 In February 2012,

Tesi was found “guilty of aggravated assault on a public servant with a deadly weapon.”236 In

June 2011, a police officer in Page, AZ, shot and killed William Foust while responding to a

domestic violence 911 call. The shooting reportedly occurred during a physical struggle in which

Foust attempted to “gain control of” the police officer’s Taser.237 According to a press account,

Foust had declared his sovereign citizen status in court proceedings in Kanab, UT (about 75 miles

from Page), related to a speeding ticket.238

229

Cindy Wolff, “West Memphis Police Sued by Widow of Man Killed in Shootout,” The Commercial Appeal, April

21, 2011; Kristina Goetz, Cindy Wolff, “Grieving West Memphis Chief Raises National Curtain on Sovereign

Citizens,” The Commercial Appeal, April 17, 2011.

230

Scott Knoll, “The Warning That Never Came: What the FBI Knew About Jerry Kane,” WREG, March 2, 2011.

231

Federal Bureau of Investigation, Recent Sovereign Citizen Extremist Targeting of Law Enforcement Highlights

Potential for Violence during Traffic Stops, June 1, 2012.

232

Jackie Valley, “Metro Infiltrates Sovereign Citizens Movement, Uncovers Plots to ‘Snatch,’ Execute Officers,” Las

Vegas Sun, August 22, 2013.

233

Ken Ritter, “Man Takes Plea Deal in Las Vegas ‘Sovereign Citizen’ Case,” Associated Press, February 7, 2014.

234

Domingo Ramirez Jr., “Man in ‘Sovereign Citizen’ Group is Wounded in Shootout,” July 22, 2011.

235

Ibid.

236

Steve Norder, “‘Sovereign Citizen’ Gets 35 Years for Assault on Officer,” Fort Worth Star-Telegram, February 1,

2012, http://www.star-telegram.com/2012/01/31/3702338/sovereign-citizen-found-guilty.html.

237

Todd Glasenapp and Larry Hendricks, “Page Officer Kills Man in DV Incident,” Arizona Daily Sun, June 21, 2011,

http://azdailysun.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/article_61e27d9d-6d47-5655-8a71-d28b846d8e3e.html.

238

Ibid. For other violent plots with alleged sovereign ties, see Alyssa Newcomb, “Suspects in Louisiana Cop Killings

Linked to Sovereign Citizens Movement,” ABC News, August 19, 2012, http://abcnews.go.com/US/alleged-louisianacop-shooters-linked-sovereign-citizen-movement/story?id=17038353#.UL4plddrq1g; J.J. MacNabb, “Sovereign

Extremist Injured in Texas Bomb Explosion,” Forbes, July 3, 2012.

Congressional Research Service

Domestic Terrorism: An Overview

Black Separatist Extremists

DOJ includes black separatism in its list of movements that potentially spawn domestic

terrorists.239 However, most black separatists solely engage in constitutionally protected behavior.

Since 9/11, there has been little public discussion of federal investigations involving black

separatist extremists. One group exhibiting what can be described as black separatist views, the

New Black Panther Party for Self Defense (NBPP), has received national attention over several

incidents.

The NBPP emerged in the early 1990s, and it is not tied to the Black Panthers from the 1960s.240

Watchdog groups have described the NBPP as “a virulently racist and anti-Semitic organization

whose leaders have encouraged violence against whites, Jews, and law enforcement officers,”241

as well as “the largest organized anti-Semitic and racist black militant group in America.”242 The

NBPP, which denies that it is a hate group, engages in “high-profile” rhetoric at rallies or

demonstrations intended to encourage confrontation with authorities. The group’s actions occur

“on behalf of the poor or disadvantaged, involving the ready display of firearms.” 243 As an

example of the rhetoric the group uses, an NBPP representative characterized the March 2011

shooting death of a drug suspect in Jacksonville, FL, as “a violent act of terrorism” committed by

police.244 Soon after the shooting, the Jacksonville Sheriff’s Office said that the confrontation

involved undercover officers serving a search warrant at an apartment. Officers claimed that

inside the apartment, the victim—an alleged drug dealer with a criminal record—was holding a

firearm.245 In an infamous recent incident, Micah Johnson shot and killed five police officers in

Dallas, TX, in July 2015. He reportedly “liked” groups on Facebook tied to black separatism and

may have been involved at some point with the NBPP in Houston.246 Johnson purportedly told

police that he wasn’t affiliated with any groups at the time of the shooting.247 He died in the

altercation with police.

In 2008, the Philadelphia, PA, chapter of the NBPP was involved in a case that generated public

controversy. A 2009 civil suit filed by DOJ claimed that two NBPP members wearing the group’s

paramilitary uniforms loitered around the entrance to a 2008 federal general election polling

station in Philadelphia. One of the NBPP members allegedly carried a nightstick. According to

DOJ, some poll watchers feared for their safety because of this activity. Philadelphia police

officers responding to claims of voter intimidation removed the nightstick-wielding NBPP

member and allowed the other to remain (the latter was a certified poll watcher). Police asked

people at the polling station whether they had been threatened by the two individuals. All those

questioned replied that they had not. However, at least one individual claimed that the presence of

239

Department of Justice, White Paper, p. 59.

D.J. Mulloy, “New Panthers, Old Panthers, and the Politics of Black Nationalism in the United States,” Patterns of

Prejudice, vol. 44, no. 3 (2010), pp. 217, 219, 229-236. Hereinafter: Mulloy: “New Panthers.”

241

Southern Poverty Law Center, “New Black Panther Party.”

242

Anti-Defamation League, “New Black Panther Party for Self Defense,” June 1, 2011.

243

Mulloy: “New Panthers,” p. 223, 233.

244

“Black Panthers Protest Police Shooting,” October 14, 2011; “Black Panthers Protest Police Shooting,” First Coast

News, March 19, 2011.

245

Ibid.

246

Melissa Jacobs, “Dallas Police Sniper Was Shunned by New Black Panthers, Says Group’s Leader,” Fox News, July

12, 2016. Brian Fung, “What You Need to Know about the Black Nationalists the Dallas Shooter Liked on Facebook,”

Washington Post, July 9, 2016; “Dallas Shooter Was Ex-Member of Houston’s New Black Panther Party,”

Click2Houston, website of NBC affiliate station in Houston, TX, July 7, 2016.

247

Ibid.

240

Congressional Research Service

Domestic Terrorism: An Overview

the two NBPP members had been intimidating.248 The NBPP disavowed the actions of its two

members.249 In May 2009, DOJ voluntarily dismissed claims against defendants in the case, and a

July 2009 letter from 10 Members of Congress to DOJ’s Inspector General questioned the

decision to do so. DOJ’s Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) investigated, and in March

2011, OPR issued a report which argued that DOJ officials did not act inappropriately regarding

the matter.250

Abortion Extremists

The vast majority of activists who either favor or oppose abortion engage in constitutionally

protected activity. However, abortion extremism involves crimes committed based on such

beliefs. Over the past two decades, most abortion-related violence appears to have targeted

abortion providers.251 Eighty-four instances of “extreme violence” targeting abortion providers

and clinics occurred in the United States from 1997 through 2015, according to one group that

supports abortion rights and tracks criminal activity intended to limit access to abortion

services.252 These cases involved shootings, bombings, arson incidents, and acid attacks.253 Since

1993, eight clinic workers have been murdered by anti-abortion extremists in the United States.254

Because of a wave of violence focused on abortion providers in the 1980s and early 1990s,

Congress passed and President Clinton signed into law the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances

Act (FACE Act) (18 U.S.C. §248) in 1994.255 As with other types of domestic terrorism

investigations, it is unclear exactly which incidents of violence perpetrated against abortion

providers the FBI considers terrorist acts.

Two violent incidents have been prominent in recent years. In 2015, Robert Dear, Jr., allegedly

killed three people and wounded nine others in a shooting at a Planned Parenthood facility in

Colorado Springs, CO.256 The 2009 murder of George Tiller, an abortion provider, received

248

Department of Justice, Office of Professional Responsibility, Report, Investigation of Dismissal of Defendants in

United States v. New Black Panther Party for Self-Defense, Inc. et al., March 17, 2011, pp. 6-8. Hereinafter: DOJ,

OPR, Investigation of Dismissal.

249

Mulloy: “New Panthers,” p. 217-218.

250

DOJ, OPR, Investigation of Dismissal, pp. 1-3.

251

There also has been at least one incident involving violence reportedly by anti-abortion activists. See Philip

Jankowski, “APD: Woman Threw Molotov Cocktail Near Anti-Abortion Protesters,” The American-Statesman,

(Austin, TX), March 24, 3015; “Woman Arrested for Throwing Molotov Cocktail in Front of Planned Parenthood,”

KXAN, NBC affiliate, Austin, TX, March 23, 2015.

252

National Abortion Federation, “Clinic Violence,” http://www.prochoice.org/about_abortion/violence/

history_extreme.asp. See also “NAF Violence and Disruption Statistics,” https://prochoice.org/education-andadvocacy/violence/violence-statistics-and-history/.

253

Ibid.

254

NARAL Pro-Choice America Foundation, “Anti-Choice Violence and Intimidation,” press release.

255

This is not a terrorism-related statute. In fact, DOJ’s Civil Rights Division, prosecutes both criminal and civil cases

involving the FACE Act. See http://www.justice.gov/crt/about/crm/overview.php; http://www.justice.gov/crt/about/spl/

face.php. The FACE Act (18 U.S.C. §248), “protects the exercise of free choice in obtaining reproductive health

services, and the exercise of First Amendment religious freedoms. Section 248 makes it unlawful for a person to use

force, threat of force, or physical obstruction to intentionally injure or intimidate a person because he/she is or has been

obtaining or providing reproductive health services. Section 248 also makes it unlawful for a person to use force, threat

of force, or physical obstruction to intentionally injure or intimidate a person because he/she is lawfully exercising the

right of religious freedom at a place of worship. Finally, Section 248 makes it unlawful for a person to intentionally

damage or destroy the property of a facility because it provides reproductive health services, or because it is a place of

worship. Section 248 also prohibits anyone from attempting to commit any of the above.”

256

Julie Turkewitz, et al. “Robert Dear, Suspect in Colorado Killings, ‘Preferred to be Left Alone,’” New York Times,

(continued...)

Congressional Research Service

Domestic Terrorism: An Overview

significant public attention. On January 29, 2010, Scott Roeder was convicted of first-degree

murder and two counts of aggravated assault for killing Tiller. Roeder shot Tiller while the latter

was at church on May 31, 2009. Roeder was sentenced to “life in prison with no possibility of

parole for 50 years.”257

A number of other unrelated schemes targeting abortion clinics have been uncovered since

Roeder’s arrest. These incidents appear to involve individuals largely operating alone.



In January 2012, Bobby Joe Rogers was charged in the firebombing of a

Pensacola, FL, abortion clinic on New Year’s Day 2012. The bombing destroyed

the clinic, which had been targeted in the past.258 In February 2012, a federal

grand jury indicted him on two counts—arson and damaging a reproductive

health facility.259 He pled guilty to the charges in July 2012.260

In May 2011, Ralph Lang was arrested after allegedly accidently firing his

handgun through the door of a hotel room in Madison, WI. He was reportedly

planning to kill abortion providers in the area.261

One underground network that supports attacks on abortion clinics is the Army of God (AOG).262

The loosely structured organization openly promotes anti-abortion violence.263 However, its

members deny that they are terrorists. They also deny that attacks against clinics and abortion

providers constitute violent activity, because they see it as “Godly work.”264 AOG first made

headlines with the 1982 kidnapping of a doctor and his wife, both of whom ran an abortion clinic

in Illinois. Three individuals who claimed membership in AOG were responsible.265 The group

(...continued)

November 28, 2015. Dear was found mentally incompetent to stand trial. Lance Benzel, “Robert Dear Remains

Mentally Incompetent to Stand Trial for Colorado Springs Planned Parenthood Attack,” Colorado Springs Gazette,

November 17, 2016.

257

Ron Sylvester, “Scott Roeder Gets Hard 50 in Murder of Abortion Provider George Tiller,” Wichita Eagle, April 1,

2010. Hereinafter: Sylvester, “Scott Roeder.” Roeder reportedly also adhered to anti-government beliefs beginning in

the 1990s. See Ron Sylvester, Abortion Issue Front and Center in Roeder Murder Trial,” January 10, 2010, Wichita

Eagle.

258

“Man Indicted for Abortion Clinic Firebombing,” Associated Press, February 23, 2012.

259

Department of Justice, “Arson Indictment Returned Regarding American Family Planning Clinic,” press release,

February 23, 2012.

260

Department of Justice, “Man Pleads Guilty to Arson of Reproductive Health Facility in Pensacola,” press release,

July 19, 2012.

261

Kevin Murphy, Feds Mull Felony Charge for Suspect Ralph Lang of Marshfield in Abortion Clinic Shooting Plot,”

Marshfield News, May 28, 2011; Department of Justice, “Wisconsin Man Charged with FACE Act Violations,” press

release, May 26, 2011, http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2011/May/11-crt-695.html. For other examples of individuals

involved in abortion-related violence, see Department of Justice, “Man Pleads Guilty to Civil Rights Violation in

Connection with Arson at Planned Parenthood and Vandalism of Mosque in Madera, California,” press release,

October 7, 2011. Mower also threw a brick at a mosque in Madera. Ryan Seals, “Update: Concord Man Charged in Plot

to Bomb Abortion Clinic,” Greensboro News and Record, September 9, 2010; “Man Guilty of Bombing Plot Gets 30

Months,” Salisbury Post, March 2, 2011.

262

National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (START), “Terrorist Organization

Profile: Army of God.” Hereinafter: START, “Army of God.”

263

Mireille Jacobson and Heather Royer, “Aftershocks: The Impact of Clinic Violence on Abortion Services,” National

Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper No. 16603, (January 7, 2010), p. 6.

264

Jennifer Jefferis, Armed for Life: The Army of God and Anti-Abortion Terror in the United States (Santa Barbara,

CA: Praeger, 2011), p. xvi. Hereinafter: Jefferis, Armed for Life.

265

Ibid., p. 23. The victims were released unharmed after eight days of captivity. See; “Abortion Opposition Stressed in

Kidnapping Trial in Illinois,” New York Times, January 26, 1983.

Congressional Research Service

Domestic Terrorism: An Overview

disseminates a manual that “is a ‘how to’ for abortion clinic violence. It details methods for

blockading entrances, attacking with butyric acid, arson, bomb making, and other illegal

activities. The manual contains anti-abortion language as well as anti-government and antigay/lesbian language. The manual begins with a declaration of war on the abortion industry.”266

Eric Rudolph, who in the late 1990s bombed an abortion clinic near Atlanta, GA, and one in

Birmingham, AL, “published his writings on the Army of God website.”267

Protected Activities vs. Terrorism—Divergent Perceptions of

the ALF

The boundary between constitutionally protected legitimate protest and terrorist activity has

received much attention in public discussions of domestic terrorism. As an example of this, the

next several sections of this report explore such considerations regarding the ALF.

A Serious Domestic Concern or “Green Scare?”

U.S. law enforcement, some business groups, and some scientists—among others—have stressed

that animal rights extremists (and ecoterrorists) are a security and law enforcement concern. In

2008, the FBI stated that animal rights extremists and ecoterrorists together posed a serious

domestic terrorism threat for several reasons, including the number of crimes attributed to animal

rights extremists and ecoterrorists (between 1,800 and 2,000 incidents accounting for more than

$110 million268 in damages from 1979 to early 2009), the broad pool of victims (such as large

pharmaceutical corporations, scientific laboratories, ski resorts, automobile dealerships,

individual researchers, and lumber companies), and the movement’s rhetoric and destructive

tactics.269 In March 2012, the FBI suggested that the threat from ecoterrorists may be declining.270

As articulated by some scientific researchers, the monetary toll on legitimate businesses and

laboratories in the United States exacted by animal rights and eco-extremists is compounded by

less tangible issues. For example, animal rights extremists and ecoterrorists have impacted the

work of scientists. In some cases, special equipment and research materials have been destroyed

266

START, “Army of God.”

Beau Seegmiller, “Radicalized Margins: Eric Rudolph and Religious Violence,” Terrorism and Political Violence,

vol. 19, no. 4 (October 2007), p. 524. The 1998 bombing in Birmingham killed a police officer and injured a nurse. On

May 31, 2003, Rudolph was arrested and charged with the clinic bombings, bombing the Centennial Olympic Park

during the 1996 summer Olympic games in Atlanta (claiming one life), and attacking a gay club—Atlanta’s Otherside

Lounge—in 1997. Rudolph admitted to the bombing spree in April 2005. He claimed that the 1996 attack at Centennial

Olympic Park was intended to shame the U.S. government for what Rudolph saw as its support of abortion rights. See

“Rudolph Pleads Guilty in Series of Bombings,” Associated Press at MSNBC, April 13, 2005; “Rudolph Agrees to Plea

Agreement,” CNN, April 12, 2005, http://articles.cnn.com/2005-04-08/justice/rudolph.plea_1_emily-lyons-eric-robertrudolph-atlanta-attacks?_s=PM:LAW.

268

ELF claims that it has caused over $150 million in damages, although the geographic range and timeframe for this

figure are unknown. Earth Liberation Front.org, “What Is the Earth Liberation Front?” Hereinafter: ELF, “What Is the

Earth?” See also http://www.animalliberationfront.com/ALFront/ELF/ELFPressOffice.htm.

269

There is some imprecision in the FBI’s public statements regarding the number of crimes committed by animal

rights extremists and ecoterrorists. In April 2009, the FBI estimated that “to date [animal rights and eco-] extremists

have been responsible for more than 1,800 criminal acts.” Ten months earlier, in June 2008, the FBI placed the number

of criminal acts at “over 2,000 since 1979.” See Michael J. Heimbach, Assistant Director, Counterterrorism Division,

Federal Bureau of Investigation, press conference, April 21, 2009. Hereinafter: Heimbach, press conference. See also

FBI, “Putting Intel.” The $110 million figure remained the same in both publicly released documents.

270

Juliet Eilperin, “As Eco Terrorism Threat Wanes, Governments Keep Eyes on Activists,” Washington Post, March

11, 2012. Hereinafter: Eilperin, “As Eco Terrorism.”

267

Congressional Research Service

Domestic Terrorism: An Overview

in attacks. The consequences of criminal activity in the name of movements such as the ALF can

also be more personal. Two advocates of animal research conducted strictly according to federal

regulations have noted that the actions of animal rights extremists have pushed some scientists to

quit lab work involving animals. Often, this work relates to products and procedures that some

maintain cannot feasibly be marketed without animal testing.271 In 2006, a UCLA professor of

behavioral neuroscience declared he was stopping his research on monkeys because of what he

described as harassment by animal rights groups.272 Additionally, animal rights extremists are said

to be driving out students from research programs.273

Critics of U.S. efforts to fight animal rights extremism and ecoterrorism have suggested that the

threat is overblown by law enforcement and that the government’s pursuit of purported extremists

perpetuates a “green scare,” chilling the exercise of protected speech by protesters.274 Some say

that the government conflates property crime with terrorism.275 Others add that people engaged in

what the government describes as animal rights extremism or ecoterrorism do not deserve the

terrorist label.

Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act (P.L. 109-374)

The Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act (P.L. 109-374; AETA) expanded the federal government’s

legal authority to combat animal rights extremists who engage in criminal activity. Signed into

law in November 2006, it amended the 1992 Animal Enterprise Protection Act (P.L. 102-346;

AEPA). Namely, the AETA

Amends the federal criminal code to revise criminal prohibitions against damaging or

interfering with the operations of an animal enterprise to include intentional damage or

loss to any real or personal property and intentional threats of death or serious bodily

injury against individuals (or their family members, spouses, or intimate partners) who

are involved with animal enterprises.276

The AETA expanded the AEPA to include both successful and attempted conspiracies. It also

prohibits intentionally placing a person in “reasonable fear” of death or serious bodily injury

while damaging or interfering in the operations of an animal enterprise. The AETA revised and

increased monetary and criminal penalties. It also stipulates that it does not prohibit First

Amendment-protected activity.

271

Conn and Parker, The Animal, pp. xii, xvi. See also 21 C.F.R. §314.610 (regarding approval based on evidence of

effectiveness from studies in animals).

272

Samantha Henig, “UCLA Professor Halts Monkey Research,” Chronicle of Higher Education, vol. 53, no. 2

(September 1, 2006), p. 21.

273

Michael Conn and James Parker, “Winners and Losers in the Animal Research Wars,” American Scientist, vol. 96,

no. 3 (May-June 2008), p. 184.

274

See Will Potter, Green Is the New Red: An Insider’s Account of a Social Movement Under Siege, (San Francisco:

City Lights Books, 2011), p. 61.

275

Coalition to Abolish the AETA, “AETA v. AEPA: A Side-by-Side Comparison,” October 16, 2008,

http://abolishtheaeta.org/web/aeta-v-aepa-a-side-by-side-comparison/; Center for Constitutional Rights, factsheet, “The

Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act (AETA),” http://ccrjustice.org/learn-more/faqs/factsheet%3A-animal-enterpriseterrorism-act-(aeta).

276

P.L. 109-374, CRS summary. Instead of damage and interference, the AEPA focused on the “physical disruption to

the functioning of an animal enterprise.” According to AETA, “animal enterprise” means: “(A) a commercial or

academic enterprise that uses or sells animals or animal products for profit, food or fiber production, agriculture,

education, research, or testing; (B) a zoo, aquarium, animal shelter, pet store, breeder, furrier, circus, or rodeo, or other

lawful competitive animal event; or (C) any fair or similar event intended to advance agricultural arts or sciences.”

Congressional Research Service

Domestic Terrorism: An Overview

DOJ successfully prosecuted individuals on charges relating to animal enterprise terrorism for the

first time under the AEPA in 2006 (the case had been built before the AETA had been signed into

law).277 Six individuals were convicted for what DOJ described as “their roles in a campaign to

terrorize officers, employees, and shareholders of HLS [Huntingdon Life Sciences, a research

corporation that performs animal research and has U.K. and U.S. facilities].”278 These individuals

belonged to an animal rights campaign named Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty (SHAC) 279 and

the entity SHAC USA, Inc. SHAC involves both legal protests and criminal activity against HLS.

Reportedly, the six incited threats, harassment, and vandalism and on this basis were convicted of

violating the AEPA.280 DOJ has noted that SHAC’s stated mission was to work “outside the

confines of the legal system.”281 DOJ proved in court that the group managed websites that

encouraged others “to direct their intimidation, harassment, and violence against HLS and its

targeted employees, as well as secondary targets—companies and employees who did business

with HLS.”282

DOJ has also successfully applied the AETA. For example, on February 14, 2011, Scott DeMuth

was sentenced to six months in prison on one count of misdemeanor conspiracy to commit animal

enterprise terrorism. He was involved in a raid that released about 200 ferrets at a Minnesota farm

in 2006. Activists had claimed the action in the name of the ALF.283 In another case, William

James Viehl and Alex Hall were sentenced to 24 months and 21 months in prison, respectively,

under AETA. The duo had released 650 minks, destroyed breeding records, and vandalized

structures at the McMullin Ranch in South Jordan, UT, in 2008.284

DOJ has experienced at least one setback in its application of the AETA. In February 2009, the

FBI announced the arrests of what it described as “four animal rights extremists.” The four (two

277

Department of Justice, “Three Militant Animal Rights Activists Sentenced to Between Four and Six Years in

Prison,” press release, September 21, 2006.

278

Ibid. See also “The SHAC 7,” http://www.shac7.com/case.htm.

279

An undercover British television report on the treatment of animals at a British company, Huntingdon Life Sciences

(HLS), sparked the creation of Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty (SHAC) in the United Kingdom in 1999. Active in a

number of countries around the world, including the United States, the campaign has tried to compel business and

financial firms to cut ties to HLS. It has involved both legal protests and crime. John P. Martin, “Animal Rights and

Wrongs,” Newark Star-Ledger, November 28, 2004; Anti-Defamation League, Ecoterrorism. For more on SHAC from

a movement perspective, see “History of the Animal Liberation Front,” http://www.animalliberationfront.com/

ALFront/Premise_History/ALF_History.htm. The SHAC campaign made its way to the United States in 2000. See

Heimbach, press conference.

280

Four of the six were guilty of other charges related to the case as well. Department of Justice, “Militant Animal

Rights Group, Six Members Convicted in Campaign to Terrorize Company, Employees, and Others,” March 2, 2006.

Hereinafter: Department of Justice, “Militant Animal Rights.” Anti-Defamation League, “Animal Rights Group

Sentenced for Inciting Violence and Stalking.” Hereinafter: Anti-Defamation League, “Animal Rights Group.”

281

Department of Justice, White Paper, p. 60.

282

Ibid. The convictions in the case were upheld by a federal appeals court in 2009. See Lisa Coryell, “Convictions of

Animal Rights Activists Upheld,” Times of Trenton, October 14, 2009. Subsequently, the U.S. Supreme Court refused

to review the case. See Center for Constitutional Rights, “U.S. v. SHAC 7,” http://ccrjustice.org/us-v-SHAC7; Will

Potter, “Supreme Court Will Not Hear SHAC 7 Case,” March 7, 2011, http://www.greenisthenewred.com/blog/shac-7supreme-court/4447/.

283

Ryan J. Foley, “Minn. Man Gets 6 Months for Raid on Ferret Farm,” Associated Press, February 14, 2011. Jennifer

Kotila, “Minneapolis Man to Be Sentenced for Releasing HL Ferrets He Thought Were Mink,” Delano Herald Journal,

(Minnesota) December 20, 2010.

284

Dennis Romboy, “Man Who Raided South Jordan Mink Farm Sentenced,” Deseret News, July 1, 2010; Department

of Justice, “Viehl Pleads Guilty to Damaging, Interfering with Animal Enterprise in Connection with McMullin Mink

Farm Incident,” press release, September 3, 2009.

Congressional Research Service

Domestic Terrorism: An Overview

women, two men, all in their 20s) allegedly violated the AETA by using “force, violence, or

threats to interfere with the operation of the University of California.”285 The incidents leading to

the indictment included protests at the houses of researchers from the University of California,

Berkeley and University of California, Santa Cruz. According to the FBI’s press release, in one

instance, three of the indicted individuals tried to forcibly enter the home of a researcher, whose

husband was hit by an object while confronting the protesters.286 In July 2010, a federal judge

dismissed the indictment against the four. According to the ruling, the indictment failed to

specifically describe crimes allegedly committed by the defendants.287 Opponents of the

prosecution stress that the case involved over-broad application of AETA to First Amendmentprotected behaviors.288

Critic

This text is long and has been trimmed here. Open the source document for the complete record.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.