Domestic Terrorism
Contents
The Rising Threat of Domestic Terrorism in America
In recent years, domestic terrorism has emerged as one of the most pressing threats to public safety in the United States. High-profile attacks like the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995, the mass shooting at Pulse nightclub in Orlando in 2016, and the attack on the U.S. Capitol in 2021 have drawn national attention to anti-government, racist, and other extremist groups operating within our borders.
While the threat from international terrorist groups like al-Qaeda and ISIS remains, federal law enforcement has warned that domestic extremists now pose the most urgent terrorism threat to the homeland. The number of domestic terrorism cases has grown significantly since 2015, with over 66% of the FBI’s domestic terror cases in 2020 related to racist, anti-government, and anti-authority violent extremism. This alarming trend shows no signs of slowing.
Defining Domestic Terrorism
Domestic terrorism involves threats or acts of violence intended to intimidate, coerce, or influence national, state, or local governments and civilian populations to promote the attackers’ ideological, political, or social goals.
Unlike foreign terrorist organizations, domestic extremist groups are often decentralized, lack hierarchical leadership structures, and operate within U.S. borders. While their ideologies and motivations vary widely, domestic terrorists are often driven by anti-government sentiment, racial or religious hatred, or idiosyncratic political beliefs rejected by mainstream society.
Some high-profile domestic terrorist attacks in recent decades include:
- 1995 Oklahoma City bombing by far-right anti-government extremist Timothy McVeigh, which killed 168 people
- 2015 mass shooting at Emanuel AME Church in Charleston by white supremacist Dylann Roof, which killed 9 African American churchgoers
- 2016 Pulse nightclub shooting in Orlando by Islamic extremist Omar Mateen, which killed 49 people
- 2018 Pittsburgh synagogue shooting by anti-Semitic gunman Robert Bowers, which killed 11 people
- 2021 attack on the U.S. Capitol by supporters of former President Trump attempting to overturn the 2020 election, which resulted in 5 deaths
Key Drivers of the Rising Threat
Domestic extremism has surged in recent years due to several concerning societal trends, including:
The Internet and Social Media: Anti-government, white supremacist, and other extremist narratives have proliferated online, allowing domestic terrorists to radicalize new recruits. Platforms like Facebook, Twitter, Telegram, and fringe websites serve as echo chambers that reinforce violent ideologies.
Political Polarization: Divisive political rhetoric and distrust of democratic institutions has energized anti-government extremists and accelerated the spread of disinformation and conspiracy theories. Some groups now view violence as necessary to resist perceived government tyranny.
Changing Demographics: Shifting racial demographics and projections of whites losing majority status by 2045 have fueled fears of “white genocide” among white supremacists. Anti-immigrant vitriol has also inspired attacks against Hispanic and Muslim communities.
Widespread Gun Access: Lax U.S. gun laws allow aspiring domestic terrorists to easily amass lethal arsenals. Extremists have exploited gaps in background checks, permitting rules, and enforcement to acquire assault-style rifles, high-capacity magazines, and body armor.
COVID-19 Pandemic: Conspiracy theories falsely blaming China, Democrats, scientists, and minorities for the COVID crisis have amplified xenophobia and anti-government rage among extremists. Pandemic stress has also taken a psychological toll and pushed unstable individuals toward violence.
Gaps in Legal Frameworks and Enforcement
A key challenge in addressing domestic terrorism is that no federal criminal statute exists to designate purely domestic acts as “terrorism”. While federal law defines international terrorism and provides material support charges for such acts, domestic extremism often falls between the cracks.
The lack of a domestic terrorism law forces the Justice Department to charge suspects with firearms violations, hate crimes, or other offenses that don’t capture the full scope of their violent ideologies and objectives. It also makes it harder for federal agencies to track domestic terror incidents and allocate resources proportionally to match the scale of this rising threat.
Domestic terrorism cases are also inherently more complex and resource-intensive for the FBI to investigate. Lone wolf attackers who self-radicalize online are difficult to detect before they act out violently. Far-right extremists are often heavily armed and willing to die for their cause, making arrests highly dangerous.
These challenges have forced federal law enforcement to make hard tradeoffs, with agencies like the FBI continuing to prioritize preventing large-scale foreign terrorist attacks over domestic incidents that result in fewer casualties but are more widespread.
But this reactive approach fails to address the root causes fueling domestic extremism. It also underestimates the cumulative damage from frequent low-level attacks on minority groups and democratic institutions. A more balanced, proactive strategy is urgently needed, even if the political will for bold action remains elusive.
Potential Solutions and Mitigation Strategies
Addressing the complex challenge posed by domestic terrorism will require action across multiple fronts, including:
- Enacting a federal domestic terrorism law establishing enhanced penalties for politically motivated violence against civilians in the U.S. and providing federal agencies with new tools to investigate and disrupt such plots. Any new statutes must strike a careful balance between security and civil liberties protections.
- Increasing funding for prevention programs that intervene with at-risk individuals before they radicalize to violence. Community-led initiatives to counter extremist messaging online have shown promising results.
- Improving federal-state cooperation and intelligence sharing to thwart threats from decentralized lone wolf attackers that stay off the federal radar. Fusion centers and joint terrorism task forces should strengthen partnerships with state and local enforcement.
- Regulating access to firearms and body armor to make it harder for extremists to acquire weapons suited for mass attacks. Reforming background checks and permitting rules could help keep guns away from dangerous individuals.
- Expanding civics education and media literacy programs to inoculate Americans against harmful disinformation campaigns and strengthen critical thinking skills. Better education on democratic values and institutions can mitigate political distrust.
- Launching counter-messaging campaigns led by formers extremists and survivors to delegitimize violent ideologies and conspiracy theories. Platforms like Moonshot CVE have found positive impacts in diverting radicalized individuals away from violence.
While domestic terrorism may never fully disappear, targeted interventions across multiple areas can help mitigate and manage the threat. With American lives and democratic institutions at stake, strong leadership and urgent action is needed to reverse the tide of political violence from within.
The Bottom Line
Domestic extremism now poses the most lethal terrorism threat to public safety within the United States. The rising danger stems from the convergence of factors like the spread of hateful ideologies online, political polarization, demographic changes, widespread gun access, and the disruptive impacts of the COVID pandemic.
Lone wolf attackers and decentralized groups motivated by anti-government, racist, and idiosyncratic beliefs are difficult for law enforcement to track and disrupt. And gaps in federal laws make it challenging to pursue domestic terrorism cases.
With violent plots proliferating, policymakers must make hard tradeoffs between security, privacy, and civil liberties. But the risks of inaction are clear. Mitigating this threat will require coordinated action across federal and state governments, technology companies, community institutions, and civil society groups before the turmoil claims more innocent lives.
What are your thoughts on the complex issue of domestic terrorism? What solutions make the most sense to you? I’m interested to hear perspectives from others as America grapples with this rising threat.
