What are the most prominent right-wing extremist groups in the US since 2020?
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
Since 2020 the landscape of U.S. right‑wing extremism has been defined less by a single dominant organization than by a constellation of overlapping movements — white‑supremacist neo‑Nazi cells, anti‑government militias, street‑level hard‑right outfits, and accelerationist networks — many of which inspired or produced high‑profile plots and violence even as some groups were disrupted by arrests and deplatforming [1] [2] [3]. Government and civil‑society analyses show right‑wing actors accounted for the large majority of domestic terrorism plots and incidents around 2019–2020, while the post‑2020 period saw both law‑enforcement crackdowns and the rise or mutation of newer networks [3] [4] [1].
1. Neo‑Nazi accelerationists and “terror cells”: Atomwaffen, The Base, National Socialist remnants
Small, violent neo‑Nazi groups that embrace accelerationism have been among the most prominent threats; Atomwaffen Division and similar formations were singled out by researchers as recent sources of lethal violence, and The Base experienced multiple arrests tied to three terrorist plots in 2020 that effectively destroyed its functioning network [2] [1]. These groups often blend offline paramilitary training with online radicalization and have been linked to killings and plots in the post‑2015 era, with researchers noting their transnational echoes and recruitment across English‑speaking countries [2] [5].
2. Militia and anti‑government networks: Oath Keepers, Boogaloo, Active Clubs
Anti‑government militias and “anti‑state” movements have been both highly visible and highly mutable: the boogaloo movement surged online before suffering significant deplatforming and law‑enforcement disruption after 2020, contributing to its decline [1]. Parallel networks such as the Active Clubs — a fast‑growing neo‑Nazi fitness‑and‑street‑activism project originating from Rise Above Movement offshoots — expanded internationally since 2020 even as precise membership numbers remain hard to verify [5]. Established militia‑style groups (often named in public reporting and government analysis) remain central to concerns about coordinated anti‑state violence [3].
3. Street movements and paramilitary “fraternal” groups: Proud Boys, Patriot Prayer, Groypers
Street‑level hard‑right groups that blend political activism with confrontational tactics figured prominently in 2019–2021 unrest: the Proud Boys and Patriot Prayer have been repeatedly cited in coverage of violent clashes and political mobilization, while “Groypers” (the Groyper Army) represent an online‑to‑real‑world strategy to push white‑nationalist ideas into conservative politics [6] [7]. These actors occupy a grey area between organized movement and loose networks; their prominence is tied as much to media attention and political contestation as to formal organizational strength [6].
4. Ku Klux Klan, legacy white‑supremacist franchises and local cells
Longstanding white‑supremacist formations — including Ku Klux Klan splinters and various “national socialist” parties — continue to exist as part of the broader right‑wing extremist ecosystem; historical continuity and local chapters mean they remain relevant to both hate crimes and recruitment even when their national profiles ebb and flow [8] [9] [4]. Scholarly and government reviews stress that many violent incidents originate from these ideologies even if the exact group label varies [4].
5. Patterns, scale and limitations: lone actors, firearms, and data caveats
Multiple analyses concur that right‑wing actors were responsible for the majority of terrorist incidents and plots in the U.S. in the 2010s and especially around 2019–2020, and that firearms were the most common weapon in these incidents; yet most attacks have been carried out by lone perpetrators or small cells rather than large hierarchies, complicating both attribution and disruption efforts [3] [1] [10]. Reporting and academic work warn that group lists undercount fluid networks and online communities, and that shifts like deplatforming or prosecutions can fragment groups without eliminating the underlying ideologies [1] [5]. Where assertions exceed the provided sources — for example, current membership numbers for specific groups — this review refrains from claim beyond cited material.