Which specific left-wing groups were identified as domestic extremists by the FBI or DHS since 2016?
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
Federal public documents from DHS and the FBI since 2016 do not present a long roster of contemporary, named “left‑wing” organizations the way they do for some far‑right groups; instead, the agencies have identified categories of left‑of‑center violent extremist threats—most prominently animal rights/environmental violent extremists and anarchist/anti‑authority violent extremists—while generally avoiding listing many specific group names in unclassified strategic products [1] [2]. Public reporting and oversight reviews make clear the government’s emphasis has been on threat categories and incidents rather than on compiling a public catalogue of left‑wing organizations, and the available sources document only a handful of historically labeled groups such as the Animal Liberation Front (ALF) from earlier FBI characterizations [3] [2].
1. How the FBI and DHS frame “left‑wing” threats: category first, names second
Since at least 2016 the FBI and DHS have described domestic terrorism more by ideological category than by exhaustive lists of organizations, placing racially‑ and ethnically‑motivated and anti‑government extremists at the top of their public threat matrices while also including animal rights/environmental extremists and certain anarchist or anti‑authority violent extremists as threat categories; the national strategy and legislative analyses both emphasize categories—“animal rights/environmental violent extremists” and “anarchist violent extremists”—rather than naming dozens of contemporary left‑wing groups [1] [2].
2. Specific left‑of‑center groups the agencies have named in public materials
Publicly available FBI/DHS strategic and historical documents referenced in reporting and oversight chiefly identify one historically labeled group by name: the Animal Liberation Front (ALF), which the FBI labeled a serious domestic terrorist threat in prior decades and which appears in summary histories of domestic terrorism; more recent unclassified joint assessments continue to treat animal‑rights and environmental violent extremism as a category instead of repeatedly naming operational cells [3] [1]. Congressional and GAO reporting confirms that DHS and FBI work with the National Counterterrorism Center and others to produce behavioral indicators and threat assessments that reference animal‑rights and environmental tactics without necessarily publishing exhaustive, named lists of active groups [4] [5].
3. “Antifa,” anarchists and the politics of naming
The agencies’ public products and oversight memos show an explicit caution about listing ideological movements as group‑names because of First Amendment concerns and the difficulty of distinguishing lawful protest from criminal violence; Congress’s legal analysis and DHS/FBI strategy language stress categorization (anarchist violent extremists) over naming, and DHS’s public reporting notably did not list “antifa” as a formal identified threat in a 2020 report despite political claims to the contrary—underscoring the agencies’ tendency to discuss tactics and ideology rather than politicized movement labels [2] [3].
4. What oversight and watchdog reporting adds (and what it doesn’t)
GAO and congressional oversight material document that federal agencies co‑produce indicators and that they have investigated domestic violent extremists across ideological spectrums, but these reviews also note that agencies have charged relatively few people specifically under domestic terrorism statutes and that intelligence products limit naming absent a foreign nexus or legal predicate—further explaining why public documents emphasize threat categories not a laundry list of left‑wing group names [4] [6].
5. Alternative viewpoints and hidden agendas in public debate
Civil liberties and advocacy groups have pushed back against any listmaking out of concern it would chill lawful dissent, a concern reflected in CRS and DHS cautions about First Amendment risks; conversely, some political actors have pressed for specific naming (for example, insisting on “antifa” as a named threat), an impulse that the FBI and DHS public materials resist by focusing on behaviors and categories—this tension reflects competing agendas between public safety, political messaging, and constitutional protections [2] [7].
6. Bottom line and limits of the public record
Based on the unclassified FBI, DHS, GAO, and congressional materials available in the record provided, federal agencies since 2016 have identified animal‑rights/environmental extremists and anarchist/anti‑authority violent extremists as left‑of‑center domestic violent extremist threat categories and have cited historical groups such as the Animal Liberation Front in background materials, but they have not produced a consistent, public list of many specific contemporary left‑wing organizational names in the same way they have described certain far‑right groups; the sources supplied do not contain an authoritative, up‑to‑date roster of named left‑wing domestic extremist groups [1] [3] [2] [4].