Domestic Violent Extremism
Domestic violent extremism represents the most urgent terrorism threat facing the United States today. The number of FBI domestic terrorism investigations has more than doubled since spring 2020, reaching approximately 2,700 investigations by the end of fiscal year 2022. Between 2010 and 2021, there were 231 documented domestic terrorism incidents resulting in approximately 145 deaths and over 370 injuries. The threat has evolved significantly in recent years, with right-wing extremism accounting for the majority of attacks and demonstrating the highest lethality rates.
Domestic violent extremism refers to individuals based and operating primarily in the United States without direction or inspiration from a foreign terrorist group who seek to further political or social goals through unlawful acts of force or violence. The FBI and Department of Homeland Security define domestic terrorism as violence or credible threats of violence intended to influence government policy or intimidate civilians for political or ideological purposes.
Unlike international terrorism, the United States does not have a mechanism to formally designate domestic terrorist organizations or charge individuals specifically with domestic terrorism due to First Amendment free speech protections. Prosecutors instead charge domestic terrorists with other crimes corresponding to their conduct, such as unlawful possession of firearms, assault, fraud, and various weapons violations.
Current Threat Assessment
A federal grand jury on 16 October 2025 charged two men with terrorism-related offenses over their alleged involvement in an attack on an immigration detention center in Texas earlier this summer. The charges mark the first time the Department of Justice (DOJ) sought and secured terrorism charges citing President Donald Trump’s recent executive order claiming to designate the anti-fascist antifa movement as a “domestic terrorist organization.” Cameron Arnold of Dallas and Zachary Evetts of Waxahachie, Texas, were among several people arrested over a July 4 shooting outside an Immigration and Customs Enforcement facility in Alvarado, Texas, during which a police officer suffered a non-fatal shot in the neck.
Attorney General Pam Bondi announced the charges on social media, claiming that they prove “Antifa is a left-wing terrorist organization.” The indictment against the two men alleged they were part of a “North Texas Antifa Cell.” The document also defined antifa as a “militant enterprise made up of networks of individuals and small groups, primarily ascribing (sic) to a revolutionary anarchist or autonomous Marxist ideology” that seeks the overthrow of the U.S. government.
In June 2021, the White House National Security Council identified domestic terrorism as the most urgent terrorism threat facing the United States, prompting the release of the nation's first National Strategy for Countering Domestic Terrorism. This assessment was reinforced by a March 2021 joint comprehensive threat assessment by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, the Department of Justice, and the Department of Homeland Security.
The threat continues to escalate. In the first half of 2025, 35% of violent events tracked by University of Maryland researchers targeted U.S. government personnel or facilities—more than twice the rate in 2024, reflecting a dramatic increase in anti-government violence. The number of FBI domestic violent extremism and domestic terrorism investigations increased from approximately 1,000 when Director Wray took office in 2017 to about 2,000 by 2021, and then to approximately 2,700 by the end of fiscal year 2022. Open FBI investigations specifically quadrupled from 1,981 in fiscal year 2013 to 9,049 in fiscal year 2021.
Federal prosecutions have also increased substantially. From October 2010 through July 2021, prosecutors charged 1,584 defendants in 1,255 cases in federal district court with crimes related to domestic terrorism. The annual number of federal district court prosecutions and charges showed a sharp increase in fiscal year 2021, largely driven by the January 6, 2021 Capitol attack.
Categories of Domestic Violent Extremism
The FBI and DHS categorize domestic terrorism threats into five main categories, recognizing that motivations vary, are nuanced, and sometimes derive from a blend of ideologies:
Racially or Ethnically Motivated Violent Extremism (REMVE)
This category encompasses the potentially unlawful use or threat of force or violence in furtherance of ideological agendas derived from bias related to race or ethnicity. RMVEs are characterized by using violence to further political and social goals rooted in bias, with those driven by belief in the superiority of the white race constituting a sizable and particularly lethal subset.
The Intelligence Community assesses that RMVEs present one of the most lethal DVE threats. RMVEs are most likely to conduct mass-casualty attacks against civilians and have been responsible for almost 65% of deaths in domestic terrorism incidents between 2010 and 2021. According to a 2017 joint intelligence bulletin from the FBI and DHS, white supremacist extremists were responsible for 49 homicides in 26 attacks from 2000 to 2016—more than any other domestic extremist movement.
White supremacist propaganda has reached historic levels. In 2023, there were 7,567 incidents of white supremacist propaganda distribution—the highest level since tracking began in 2017 and a 12% increase from 2022's record of 6,751 incidents. This represents an average of about 20 incidents per day. Antisemitic propaganda increased by 30% in 2023, rising to 1,112 incidents from 852 in 2022. Three groups—Patriot Front, National Justice Party, and Goyim Defense League—were responsible for 92% of propaganda activity in 2023. There were also 282 documented white supremacist events in 2023, a 63% increase from 173 recorded in 2022.
White supremacists are the DVE actors with the most persistent and concerning transnational connections because individuals with similar ideological beliefs exist outside the United States. These extremists frequently communicate with and seek to influence each other across borders. A small number of U.S. RMVEs have traveled abroad to network with like-minded individuals.
Many white supremacist extremists subscribe to conspiracy theories such as the "Great Replacement" theory, which claims that whites are being systematically replaced or eradicated by ethnic and racial minorities, including Jews and immigrants. This conspiracy theory has motivated numerous attacks, including the 2019 El Paso Walmart shooting (23 deaths), the 2019 Poway synagogue shooting (1 death), and the 2018 Pittsburgh Tree of Life synagogue shooting (11 deaths).
Anti-Government or Anti-Authority Violent Extremism
This category encompasses the potentially unlawful use or threat of force or violence in furtherance of ideological agendas derived from anti-government or anti-authority sentiment, including opposition to perceived economic, social, or racial hierarchies, or perceived government overreach, negligence, or illegitimacy. It includes three distinct subtypes: Anarchist Violent Extremism (AVE), Sovereign Citizen Violent Extremism (SCVE), and Militia Violent Extremism (MVE).
Militia violent extremists are motivated by a belief that private citizens must use violence to resist government overreach, combat purported tyranny, or maintain law and order. While participants in the broader militia movement embrace similar beliefs, MVEs are distinguished by their willingness to carry out violence. The modern militia movement formed in the early 1990s, presenting a more consistent anti-government ideology than its predecessors.
The militia movement developed through three distinct waves. The first wave emerged following the 1992 Ruby Ridge standoff and the 1993 Waco siege. The 1995 Oklahoma City bombing raised the militia movement's profile, though it led to decreased activity through the late 1990s and early 2000s. A second wave began during Barack Obama's presidency, with the number of anti-government militias more than doubling between 2009 and 2010, to 330 groups. A third wave began during the 2016 presidential campaign and Trump presidency, with militias emboldened by policy changes and rhetoric they perceived as validating their beliefs.
The Southern Poverty Law Center identified 52 active militia groups throughout the United States in 2023, a decline from 61 in 2022 stemming from continued fallout from the January 6 insurrection. Despite this numerical decline, the threat remains elevated. More than 80 individuals charged for actions on January 6 were either members of identified antigovernment organizations or motivated by the movement's conspiracies. MVEs typically target law enforcement and government personnel and facilities.
Animal Rights/Environmental, Abortion-Related, and Other Violent Extremism
According to the FBI in June 2008, eco-terrorists and extreme animal rights activists represented "one of the most serious domestic terrorism threats in the US" at that time. The Earth Liberation Front was labeled a serious domestic terrorist threat by the FBI in the early 2000s, most notable for arsons resulting in millions of dollars in damage, along with vandalism and destruction of vehicles, construction and logging equipment, and buildings.
Abortion-related violent extremism encompasses individuals who advocate for violence in support of either pro-life or pro-choice beliefs. Since 1997, there have been 8 murders, 17 attempted murders, 42 bombings, and 186 arson attacks aimed at abortion clinics and providers across the United States. Notable incidents include the 2009 murder of Dr. George Tiller by Scott Roeder and the 2015 Planned Parenthood shooting in Colorado Springs by Robert Lewis Dear that killed three people.
The "All Other Domestic Terrorism Threats" category encompasses threats involving the potentially unlawful use or threat of force or violence in furtherance of ideological agendas not otherwise defined under the other categories. Such agendas could flow from a combination of personal grievances and beliefs. Some actors in this category may also carry bias related to religion, gender, or sexual orientation.
Attack Patterns and Major Incidents
Data from the Center for Strategic and International Studies analyzing 725 terrorist attacks and plots between January 1994 and April 2024 reveals significant patterns in domestic terrorism. Right-wing attacks and plots account for the majority of all terrorist incidents in the United States since 1994. From 2015 to 2020, right-wing extremists were involved in 267 plots or attacks resulting in 91 fatalities. During the same period, attacks and plots ascribed to far-left views accounted for 66 incidents leading to 19 deaths.
The data shows that far-right terrorism has significantly outpaced terrorism from other types of perpetrators. In 2020, right-wing extremists were responsible for 90% of attacks and plots, and in 2019, they were responsible for about 66% of all attacks and plots. In 2018, every extremist-related murder in the United States was carried out by a right-wing extremist. In 2022, white supremacists were behind over 80% of extremism-related U.S. murders.
Between 2010 and 2021, domestic terrorism incidents occurred across the United States, but the greatest number occurred in states with major metropolitan areas. California (Los Angeles, San Diego, and San Francisco), New York (New York City), and Washington, D.C. experienced the highest number of incidents. In 2023, white supremacist propaganda was reported in every U.S. state except Hawaii and Alaska.
High-profile attacks from 2015 to 2024 include the Charleston Church Shooting (June 17, 2015, 9 deaths), Dallas Police Officers attack (July 2016, 5 deaths), Charlottesville vehicle attack (August 12, 2017, 1 death), Pittsburgh Tree of Life Synagogue shooting (October 27, 2018, 11 deaths), Poway Synagogue shooting (April 27, 2019, 1 death), El Paso Walmart shooting (August 3, 2019, 23 deaths), the January 6, 2021 Capitol Attack (over 725 individuals charged), and the Buffalo Supermarket shooting (May 2022, 10 deaths).
From January 1, 2016 to April 30, 2024, there were 21 terrorist attacks and plots against elected officials, political candidates, political party officials, political staff and workers, and their offices from terrorists with opposing political views, compared to just 2 such incidents in the more than two preceding decades. From January 2020 to April 2024, 50 attacks or plots were directed at government, military, and law enforcement targets—the highest category during this period.
The January 6, 2021 Capitol Attack
The January 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol represents a watershed moment in understanding domestic violent extremism. FBI Director Christopher Wray characterized the incident as domestic terrorism. The attack was widely regarded as an insurrection and an attempted coup d'état because its object was to prevent a legitimate president-elect from assuming office.
More than 1,200 people faced charges for their actions on January 6. At least 280 of the individuals charged with committing crimes were associated with extremist groups or conspiratorial movements. The two main domestic extremist organizations present were the Proud Boys and the Oath Keepers, whose members arrived as part of organized cells or groups who planned to disrupt the election certification, or as lone actors drawn by conspiracy theories about election fraud.
According to the University of Maryland's National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism, the "ordinary people" argument misses or obscures the extent to which the Capitol rioters were linked to dangerous groups and ideas. Individuals with military backgrounds present on January 6 were around four times more likely to be members of a domestic extremist organization compared to the total number of individuals charged.
Stewart Rhodes, leader and founder of the Oath Keepers, along with other members, participated in the insurrection. About 20 Oath Keepers followers have been convicted for their insurrectionist activities. Rhodes was convicted of seditious conspiracy. Fifty-one Proud Boys members were charged in connection with January 6. The group's leadership allegedly coordinated activities through encrypted Telegram chats, with instructions to avoid traditional Proud Boys colors and instead wear all black to blend in.
The FBI and Department of Homeland Security had warned of armed protests and plans by Trump supporters that included violence in the days leading up to January 6. On December 30, 2020, comments were posted stating "I'm thinking it will be literal war on that day. Where we'll storm offices and physically remove and even kill all the D.C. traitors and reclaim the country." Organizations monitoring online extremism issued warnings about the event, and on January 5, media published stories about widespread predictions of violence.
The FBI assessed that domestic violent extremists pose an elevated threat of violence to the United States, and some actors have been emboldened in the aftermath of the breach of the Capitol. The attack demonstrated that racially or ethnically motivated violent extremists, anti-government or anti-authority violent extremists, and other DVEs would likely pose the greatest domestic terrorism threats in 2021 and beyond.
Online Radicalization and Social Media
Online technologies and internet platforms have become integral to domestic violent extremism, fundamentally transforming how extremists recruit, radicalize, and mobilize. Research indicates that in 2016 alone, social media played a role in the radicalization processes of nearly 90% of extremists. The number of extremists relying on social media for dissemination of extremist content and facilitation of extremist relationships has grown exponentially.
Studies show that radicalization pathways vary significantly. In one study of 235 cases of radicalized extremists, 12% had been radicalized primarily online, 40% primarily offline, and 48% through a mix of influences. Online radicalization coincided with a greater likelihood of mental illness or personality disorder being present, as well as a lower degree of social connection with other extremists offline (63% were classified as lone actors).
However, the relationship between online engagement and violence is complex. Research has found that as social media engagement increased, the duration of the radicalization process decreased. While online radicalization alone may result in less violent offenders compared to those radicalized through mixed pathways, individuals radicalized online can still pose significant threats—32% showed high levels of engagement with extremist causes and groups, while 15% showed high levels of intent regarding future offending.
Social media platforms serve different functions in the extremism ecosystem. Mainstream platforms like Instagram, Reddit, and Facebook serve as entry points for new members, where extremist content is widely accessible, often disguised as memes or news. These spaces contain misinformation and disinformation strategically introduced to manipulate vulnerable individuals. Alternative platforms like Telegram, Gab, 4chan, and similar platforms with more permissive content policies provide spaces where more radical discussions take place.
While YouTube recommendations rarely direct users to extremist content, substantial proportions of consumers of extremist content on YouTube arrive from other extremist sites. Users already holding resentful attitudes about race and gender seek out this content via channel subscriptions and referrals from fringe platforms like Parler and Gab.
Despite efforts to remove or reduce the visibility of extremist content, social media platforms continue to provide hospitable environments for content espousing violence, hate, and conspiracist thinking. Participation in extremist online spaces correlates with increased participation in subsequent incidents of extremist civil unrest. Examples include the Tree of Life shooter's engagement with violent antisemitic groups online and the January 6 perpetrators' coordination across various platforms and communities.
Online extremism has progressed through successive generations. The first generation featured static websites and forums. The second generation involved social media platforms enabling broader reach and more sophisticated recruitment. The third generation is characterized by encrypted chatrooms, young radicalized individuals (including teenagers), communication with peers across oceans, exposure to esoteric mixes of extremist traditions, and increased sophistication in evading content moderation. The capture of Feuerkrieg Division's 13-year-old leader in Estonia in 2020 provided shocking evidence of the third generation's impact—individuals in their early teens were not just being recruited by neo-Nazis but were actively recruiting and leading their peers.
Motivating Factors and Demographics
The Intelligence Community identifies enduring DVE motivations that will almost certainly continue to drive radicalization and mobilization to violence: biases against minority populations, perceived government overreach related to legal or policy changes, perceptions of government overreach, negligence, or illegitimacy, and opposition to perceived economic, social, or racial hierarchies.
Several newer sociopolitical developments have spurred DVE mobilization: narratives of fraud in elections, the emboldening impact of the violent breach of the U.S. Capitol, conditions related to the COVID-19 pandemic, conspiracy theories promoting violence, contentious sociopolitical factors that motivate militia violent extremists, and high-profile attacks spurring follow-on attacks and innovations in targeting and attack tactics.
Conspiracy theories play a significant role in driving domestic violent extremism, particularly election denialism and the Great Replacement conspiracy theory. The Great Replacement theory claims that whites are being systematically replaced or eradicated by ethnic and racial minorities. This conspiracy theory has motivated numerous high-profile attacks and has seeped from the margins of extremist beliefs into mainstream dialogue.
Historical patterns show militia movement growth correlating with economic uncertainty and Democratic administrations. The 2008 housing crisis, combined with Barack Obama's election as the first Black president, re-ignited concerns among militia movement supporters about gun confiscation, globalization, and anti-government conspiracy theories. Similarly, a third wave of militia activity began during the 2016 presidential campaign and Trump presidency.
The Intelligence Community assesses that lone offenders or small cells of DVEs adhering to a diverse set of violent extremist ideologies are more likely to carry out violent attacks in the Homeland than organizations that allegedly advocate a DVE ideology. DVE attackers often radicalize independently by consuming violent extremist material online and mobilize without direction from a violent extremist organization, making detection and disruption challenges significant. DVE lone offenders pose significant detection and disruption challenges because of their capacity for independent radicalization to violence, ability to mobilize discretely, and access to weapons.
Given the growth of violent domestic extremism among military personnel, the relationship between military service and radicalization has become a major concern. Prior research has identified military experience as a potential risk factor for attempted and actual terrorism. The likelihood of radicalization and radicalization to violence increases when individuals have already left military service. Individuals with military experience may be susceptible to recruitment by domestic violent extremist groups due to their unique skills. Transitioning from military to civilian life appears to be a pull factor for engaging in violent extremism.
The January 6 Capitol attack renewed concerns about radicalization among active duty and retired military members. An investigation revealed that 15.2% of those arrested following January 6 had military backgrounds—higher than initially reported. In 2023, there were 183 investigations of alleged extremism within the U.S. military. A 2006 FBI bulletin discussed the threat of white nationalists and skinheads infiltrating police to disrupt investigations against fellow members and recruit other supremacists within law enforcement.
National Strategy and Prevention Efforts
In June 2021, following a 100-day comprehensive review ordered by President Biden, the administration released the first-ever National Strategy for Countering Domestic Terrorism. The strategy provides a nationwide framework for the U.S. Government and partners to understand and share domestic terrorism-related information, prevent domestic terrorism recruitment and mobilization to violence, disrupt and deter domestic terrorism activity, and confront long-term contributors to domestic terrorism.
The strategy is organized around four pillars: (1) Understanding and Sharing Domestic Terrorism-Related Information, emphasizing improved information-sharing across federal government and with state, local, tribal, and territorial law enforcement partners; (2) Preventing Domestic Terrorism Recruitment and Mobilization to Violence, focusing on addressing the role of the Internet and enhancing support for law enforcement partners; (3) Disrupting and Deterring Domestic Terrorism Activity, prioritizing domestic terrorism-related investigations and prosecutions with over $100 million in additional resources; and (4) Confronting Long-Term Contributors to Domestic Terrorism, addressing underlying conditions including polarization fueled by disinformation and conspiracy theories.
As of 2023, agencies have taken steps to implement 49 of 58 activities identified in the strategy. Key accomplishments include: the DHS Center for Prevention Programs and Partnerships Targeted Violence and Terrorism Prevention Grant Program doubled its annual funding to $20 million in 2021; CP3 has invested $40 million across the United States; since 2021, CP3 has delivered nearly 250 briefings to communities; DOJ formed a domestic terrorism unit within the National Security Division's Counterterrorism Section; and the DHS National Threat Evaluation and Reporting Program Office has trained over 200 Master Trainers.
However, a 2025 Government Accountability Office report found that the strategy does not fully address six desirable characteristics of an effective national strategy: it does not include a comprehensive risk assessment, does not clarify which federal entity is responsible for oversight, does not consistently include milestones and performance measures, does not provide adequate resource information, lacks clear articulation of federal agency roles and responsibilities, and does not specify time frames for completing activities.
The federal government defines the U.S. approach to countering violent extremism as proactive actions to counter efforts by extremists to recruit, radicalize, and mobilize followers to violence. The three parts of the U.S. approach are: empowering communities and civil society, messaging and counter-messaging, and addressing causes and driving factors. CVE activities differ from traditional counterterrorism efforts such as collecting intelligence, gathering evidence, making arrests, and responding to incidents, in that they generally focus on preventing an individual from finding or acting on a motive for committing a crime before a terrorist act transpires.
NIJ-supported evaluation studies of CVE programs offer mixed results. The WORDE program became the first research-based countering violent extremism program in the United States, though outcomes for participants were not significantly better than comparison groups. The Peer to Peer/Invent2Prevent Initiative encourages students to develop social campaigns and educational interventions to counter violent extremist rhetoric. Since 2015, the initiative has developed more than 250 campaigns.
Many contemporary approaches to curtail violent extremism lack evidence of success. Many programs have resulted in profiling, discrimination, and resentment in the individuals they were meant to help. Sometimes programs have been shown to increase an individual's sense of isolation and inspire violent behavior. A public health approach could address and mitigate many of these issues by broadening the focus beyond religion, ideology, or motivation and embedding the effort into violence prevention more generally.
Law Enforcement and Civil Liberties Challenges
The FBI is responsible for leading law enforcement and domestic intelligence efforts to prevent and disrupt terrorist attacks. Within FBI headquarters, the Counterterrorism Division manages the FBI's Domestic Terrorism Program. The FBI-led Joint Terrorism Task Forces are the nation's front line on terrorism, composed of task force officers from federal, state, and local law enforcement who collect and share information. The Department of Homeland Security tracks terrorism-related incidents and is responsible for gathering and sharing intelligence on emerging terrorist threats.
A 2023 Government Accountability Office report found that while the FBI and DHS generally followed leading collaboration practices, they had not assessed whether their collaboration agreements fully reflect their needs. FBI officials stated they did not use the data DHS collects on domestic terrorism incidents because they were not aware DHS was collecting it. DHS officials stated they didn't share their incident data with FBI counterparts because they weren't asked for it.
Until recently, federal agencies such as DHS and the FBI did not specifically address the domestic terrorism threat in their budgets. Instead, agencies used existing funding streams to address the threat. Today, federal agencies describe the nature and extent of domestic terrorism threats in their budget requests and allocate resources accordingly. In fiscal year 2022, Congress appropriated additional resources for the FBI to counter domestic terrorism.
A 2015 nationwide survey of 382 police and sheriff departments by the Triangle Center on Terrorism and Homeland Security found that nearly 74% of respondents stated that anti-government violence was their top concern with regard to threats from violent extremists, while about 39% stated that "Al Qaeda-inspired" violence was their top concern.
The United States faces unique challenges in addressing domestic violent extremism due to First Amendment protections. Unlike foreign terrorism, the federal government does not have a mechanism to formally designate domestic terrorist organizations. U.S. law bars the government from labeling domestic political organizations as terrorist entities because of First Amendment free speech protections. There is no federal crime of domestic terrorism. However, prosecutors can charge domestic terrorists with other crimes corresponding to their conduct.
Simply espousing anti-government rhetoric is not against the law. However, seeking to advance that ideology through force or violence is illegal. This creates significant detection challenges, as law enforcement must distinguish between protected speech and actionable threats. The unpredictable target selection by DVEs makes it difficult for law enforcement to effectively detect, prevent, preempt, or respond to DVE threats and terrorist attacks.
Throughout the development and implementation of counterterrorism strategies, agencies are mindful of the duty to respect privacy, civil rights, and civil liberties and to act within the authorities granted to them. The FBI does not investigate people in the United States for constitutionally protected speech, activism, or ideological beliefs. However, challenges remain. If CVE programming determines vulnerability in terms of racial background, ethnicity, national origin, or ideology, then "suspect" communities are identified as precriminal, which can result in profiling, discrimination, and resentment.
International Dimensions and Future Outlook
While domestic violent extremists operate primarily within the United States without direction from foreign groups, they are not entirely isolated from international influences. White supremacists have the most persistent transnational connections, as individuals with similar ideological beliefs exist outside the United States, and these extremists frequently communicate with and seek to influence each other.
International attacks have inspired domestic violence. The 2019 Christchurch mosque shooting in New Zealand (51 deaths) inspired subsequent attacks in the United States, including the Poway synagogue shooting and the El Paso Walmart shooting. Similarly, the 2011 Norway attack by Anders Breivik (77 deaths) inspired subsequent white supremacist attackers, including the Christchurch shooter. The rise of domestic violent extremism is not unique to the United States. A Center for Strategic and International Studies study found that the number of terrorist attacks by far-right perpetrators quadrupled between 2016 and 2017 in the United States, while far-right attacks in Europe rose 43% over the same period.
The Department of Homeland Security assessed that the terrorism threat landscape will remain high in 2025, including potential violent extremist responses to domestic sociopolitical developments. With threats emanating from across the ideological spectrum, U.S. intelligence agencies are entering 2025 with a complex terror threat landscape. An October 2024 report by the Center for Strategic and International Studies revealed that over the past five years, the number of domestic terrorist attacks and plots targeting government institutions has tripled compared to the previous 25 years.
FBI Director Wray stated that trends may shift, but the underlying drivers for domestic violent extremism—such as perceptions of government or law enforcement overreach, sociopolitical conditions, racism, anti-Semitism, Islamophobia, misogyny, and reactions to legislative actions—remain constant. Several factors could increase the likelihood or lethality of DVE attacks: escalating support from persons in the United States or abroad, growing perceptions of government overreach related to legal or policy changes, disruptions from major sociopolitical events, and high-profile attacks spurring follow-on attacks and innovations in targeting and tactics.
The rapid pace of technological innovation presents ongoing challenges. The adoption of large language models and generative AI tools will bring new challenges and disruptions. The science of algorithmic recommendation systems, content moderation, and digital media must continue to evolve quickly to investigate the means by which ideas that threaten public safety spread, take hold, and endanger lives.
Despite increased law enforcement pressure and public scrutiny following January 6, extremist groups are adapting rather than disappearing. Militia groups are returning to more local and regional structures, which reflects both a strategic decision following insurrection fallout and a broader trend of extremists seeking to build political power at the local level. Some militias are seeking recognition from county governments through official resolutions to legitimize their activities. Many deliberately portray themselves as benign entities training to help communities during emergencies, creating an intentional disconnect between their public messaging and actual purpose.
