Have federal agencies (FBI/DHS) published data on Antifa activity and where can I find it?
Executive summary
Federal agencies have recently increased public statements and actions addressing “Antifa,” including a White House executive order designating Antifa as a domestic terrorist organization [1] and Attorney General Pam Bondi’s instruction that the FBI compile lists and step up investigations into Antifa and similar groups [2] [3]. DHS and DOJ press releases and agency web pages have published arrest announcements, statistics framed as spikes in assaults on federal officers, and related materials that the agencies present as evidence of Antifa-linked activity [4] [5] [6].
1. What federal agencies have said and ordered — the official record
The Attorney General directed federal law enforcement to “step up investigations” and asked the FBI to compile a list of entities “engaged in acts that may constitute domestic terrorism,” with Joint Terrorism Task Forces directed to prioritize such cases and the FBI given 30 days to propose disruption strategies [2] [3]. The White House issued an executive action designating Antifa as a “domestic terrorist organization” and ordered agencies to use authorities to investigate, disrupt and dismantle related operations [1]. DHS has published multiple press releases and pages framing arrests, alleged ambushes, doxxing incidents and large percentage increases in assaults on ICE officers as Antifa-related threats [4] [5] [6].
2. Where to find agency data and documents
Public-facing sources cited in current reporting include: the White House presidential actions page for the Antifa designation [1]; Reuters and Bloomberg Law reporting that reviewed Bondi’s internal memo and described the FBI tasking [2] [3]; and DHS press releases and topic pages that detail arrests, alleged incidents, and statistics on assaults on ICE and other personnel [4] [5] [6]. The State Department’s releases on designating several foreign groups as terrorist organizations also appear on state.gov [7] [8].
3. What the agencies are publishing — examples and the form of the data
Agency output is a mix of executive orders, internal memos reported by news outlets, press releases, and topical webpages. The White House text asserts patterns of coordinated violent activity and directs investigatory action [1]. Bondi’s memo — described in Reuters and Bloomberg Law reporting — orders the FBI to develop a list and disruption strategies, and to automate tip intake of media [2] [3]. DHS has released narrative press statements claiming specific arrests and large percentage increases in assaults on ICE, plus PDF records related to labeling “antifa” [4] [9] [6].
4. Limits of the publicly released data and what reporting says about gaps
Independent analysts and think tanks noted limits and context: CSIS and other assessments conclude Antifa is decentralized and poses a relatively small threat compared with violent white supremacists and militia groups, and that Antifa is better described as an ideology than a single organization [10]. Reporting and expert commentary highlighted that “Antifa” lacks a unified command, complicating agency claims that treat it like an organization [10] [11]. Several journalists and experts caution that naming disparate actors as “Antifa” can conflate protest activity, crime, and organized terrorism — something Congressional Research Service work and scholars have previously observed [10] [12].
5. Competing narratives and political context
Federal materials and allied outlets present a narrative of rising, organized Antifa violence and operational networks that can be tracked and prosecuted [4] [5] [13]. Independent outlets, analysts and some news coverage push back: they describe Antifa as decentralized, argue some government claims overstate coordination or scale, and note that some foreign “Antifa” designations do not map cleanly onto U.S. protest movements [10] [11] [14]. Legal and civil-liberties experts warn that aggressive labeling and data collection could erode liberties and mischaracterize spontaneous protest-related incidents [12].
6. How to evaluate what you find — practical guidance
If you’re looking for federal data, start with the primary sources: the White House presidential actions page for the September designation [1]; the Department of Justice/Bondi memo as described by Reuters and Bloomberg Law [2] [3]; DHS press releases and the DHS “Domestic Terrorism” topic page for incident claims and statistics [4] [5] [6]; and State Department releases on foreign designations [7] [8]. Cross-check agency claims against independent analyses from CSIS and reporting that contextualizes decentralization and comparative threat levels [10]. Where agencies cite statistics (e.g., percentage increases in assaults), look for methodology and underlying data; available sources do not publish raw, independently verifiable datasets in these releases [6].
7. Bottom line: evidence, ambiguities and what’s not publicly shown
Federal agencies have published orders, press releases and designations that treat Antifa as a target for investigation and enforcement [1] [2] [4]. But the underlying evidentiary picture is contested: expert assessments and reporting emphasize Antifa’s decentralization and warn against treating the label as a single, organized actor [10] [11]. Available sources do not publish comprehensive, public datasets that definitively map a nationwide Antifa organizational network; the public record instead consists of policy directives, press accounts of arrests, and agency-statements with limited methodological transparency [3] [9].