type: timeline_event
Attorney General Pam Bondi issued a classified memorandum on December 4, 2025, ordering the FBI and all federal law enforcement agencies to compile a list of groups expressing what the Department of Justice characterizes as "domestic terrorism." The leaked memo, first published by investigative journalist Ken Klippenstein, defines potential domestic terrorism through ideological characteristics including "anti-American sentiment," "anti-capitalism," "anti-Christianity," "adherence to radical gender ideology," "opposition to law and immigration enforcement," and "extreme views in favor of mass migration and open borders." The directive represents an operational implementation of President Trump's National Security Presidential Memorandum-7 (NSPM-7), issued in September 2025 following the assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk.
The memorandum establishes sweeping enforcement mechanisms that legal experts characterize as unprecedented in scope. The FBI must provide within 30 days a list of groups "engaged in acts that may constitute domestic terrorism" along with disruption strategies, with mandatory updates every 30 days thereafter. The directive orders a five-year retroactive review of all FBI files "focusing on files and holdings for Antifa and Antifa-related intelligence," creates a cash reward system for citizens reporting suspected extremists, and requires all encounters with suspected domestic terrorism be referred to Joint Terrorism Task Forces for "exhaustive investigation" using "all available investigative tools" to "map the full network of culpable actors." Within 60 days, the FBI must disseminate an intelligence bulletin describing targeted "organizations' structures, funding sources, and tactics."
Arnold & Porter, a major law firm, characterized the directive as "one of the most consequential internal directives in recent years," warning it applies counterterrorism frameworks traditionally reserved for foreign threats to domestic political activities. The firm notes prosecutors are instructed to pursue "the most serious, readily provable offenses" including conspiracy statutes, material support for terrorism provisions, RICO charges, and seditious conspiracy, identifying approximately 20+ federal statutes that may be weaponized. Tax-exempt organizations and their donors face particular scrutiny, with the directive explicitly instructing prosecutors to investigate "funding sources" and pursue tax crimes where "extremist groups are suspected of defrauding the Internal Revenue Service," potentially targeting nonprofit tax-exempt status.
Civil liberties organizations and legal experts have issued stark warnings about constitutional violations. Democracy Docket emphasizes that "supporting any of the views Bondi names in the memo...is protected speech under the First Amendment," noting the memo's definition of "domestic terrorism" encompasses protected political speech and viewpoints. While the memorandum includes a footnote disclaiming investigations based "solely on activities protected by the First Amendment," Arnold & Porter identifies a "critical tension" in defining domestic terrorism through ideological characteristics rather than conduct alone, stating that "individuals and organizations that disagree with the Trump administration undoubtedly will be concerned about federal scrutiny." The firm warns the directive "likely will have a significant chilling effect on the activity of individuals, organizations, and funders whom the Trump administration may view as opposed to its policies," and cautions that "conduct traditionally viewed or investigated as protest-related or cyber-enabled crimes" may now be prosecuted as terrorism-adjacent offenses carrying significant criminal penalties.
Ken Klippenstein describes the memo as targeting "just about anyone who isn't MAGA," emphasizing its scope extends beyond traditional leftist activism to mainstream political opposition. The directive's focus on nonprofit funding, combined with retroactive investigation authority and informant rewards, creates what critics characterize as infrastructure for systematically identifying, surveilling, and prosecuting Americans based on political beliefs rather than criminal actions, fundamentally threatening First Amendment rights and democratic dissent.