Fbi listing sustainable community organizers as terrorists
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
The FBI and Justice Department have recently been directed to expand domestic-terrorism investigations, including compiling lists of groups and disseminating intelligence on movements like antifa; Attorney General Pam Bondi’s Dec. 4 memorandum instructs the FBI and JTTFs to identify “entities possibly engaged in domestic terrorism” and to adopt disruption strategies used against organized crime [1] [2]. Separately, the FBI and DOJ have publicly called some violent plots by self-identified “far-left” groups terrorism — most recently citing arrests tied to the Turtle Island Liberation Front in a foiled New Year’s Eve bombing plot [3] [4] [5].
1. What the memo actually orders: a new, aggressive posture
The Justice Department memo dated Dec. 4 requires federal law enforcement to step up investigations into groups it deems “extremist,” directs the FBI and Joint Terrorism Task Forces (JTTFs) to compile a list of entities that may have engaged in domestic terrorism, and to use tactics similar to those for violent and organized crime to “disrupt and dismantle entire networks” [1] [2]. Legal analysis by Arnold & Porter notes the directive is operational and retroactive and instructs the FBI to disseminate intelligence on Antifa-aligned groups and to establish a cash reward system for informants [6].
2. Does the FBI officially list “sustainable community organizers” as terrorists?
Available sources do not mention “sustainable community organizers” being listed by the FBI as terrorists; the public documents and reporting focus on categories like antifa, anti-government violent extremism, and explicit groups tied to violent plots [6] [2]. The reporting and DOJ memo discuss compiling lists of groups “possibly engaged in domestic terrorism” and investigating incidents over the past five years — they do not enumerate eco-activists or sustainable-organizing groups by name in the materials provided [2] [7].
3. How the government defines targets and why that matters
The DOJ memo instructs agencies to consider acts that “may constitute domestic terrorism,” including violent acts and organized conduct such as doxxing, coordinated attacks on non-profits, and targeting officials — language that broadens investigative scope beyond clearly lethal plots and has raised civil liberties concerns [7] [1]. Civil-rights advocates warn that vague or expansive definitions can bring nonviolent protest, civil disobedience, or community organizing into the orbit of counterterrorism if investigators interpret property damage or coordination as terrorism [8].
4. Examples DOJ/FBI point to when labeling violence as terrorism
Federal prosecutors and the FBI have used terrorism statutes against groups accused of violent conspiracies: the arrests of four people tied to the Turtle Island Liberation Front were publicly described as disrupting a “credible, imminent terrorist threat” involving planned IED bombings aimed at multiple Los Angeles-area sites and federal officers [4] [5] [3]. That enforcement example shows the government treating organized plots with clear violent intent differently from peaceful organizing [4].
5. The operational and political pressures shaping the policy
The Dec. 4 memo follows executive actions and designations aimed at violent movements and cartels earlier in 2025 and directives from the White House and State Department that tilt priorities toward identifying and eliminating organized violent actors [9]. Reuters and other reporting tie AG Bondi’s orders to a political push to investigate antifa and similar movements, and to produce lists of groups for prosecutors and FBI leadership to monitor [2] [1].
6. Where ambiguity creates risk — and where it doesn’t
The memorandum empowers broad investigations and retroactive review of incidents over five years, potentially sweeping in a wide range of conduct; legal commentary flags that the list the FBI must compile is not a statutory terrorist designation but could functionally stigmatize organizations and invite whistleblower reports under a new cash-reward system [6]. However, publicly cited criminal cases tied to alleged terrorism in the available reporting focus on conspiracies involving explosives and other violent acts — not on nonviolent community sustainability efforts [4] [5].
7. What to watch next
Watch for the FBI’s intelligence bulletin on Antifa-aligned groups and the compiled list to be produced and for details on the reward/tip system, since those outputs will show whether categories expand to nonviolent civic actors or remain aimed at networks accused of violent conduct [6]. Also track DOJ referrals and any prosecutions that result from the retroactive reviews the memo mandates to see how investigative scope is applied [7].
Limitations: reporting and source documents provided here do not mention any FBI designation or listing of “sustainable community organizers” as terrorists; they document broader DOJ directives, examples of prosecutions of alleged violent groups, and analysis warning about overly broad definitions [2] [4] [8].