The Trump administration has referred to the two Americans that were killed by immigration agents in Minneapolis this month as domestic terrorists.
But there is no formal charge of domestic terrorism in the United States, and experts say it is highly unusual to refer to victims of fatal shootings with that term, especially before an extensive investigation.
The statements about the two American protesters, Renee Good and Alex Pretti, came as administration officials defended agents from the Homeland Security Department who had been deployed in Minnesota, suggesting the killings were justified.
The comments are the most high-profile examples yet of the administration’s practice of insinuating that some of its political adversaries are terrorists.
How do prosecutors define domestic terrorism?
Domestic terrorism has an unusual status in federal law. There is no formal charge of domestic terrorism, meaning that a person cannot be convicted of that specific crime. Typically, federal prosecutors will attempt to persuade judges after a conviction — during the sentencing phase of a criminal proceeding — that a crime constituted domestic terrorism.
Though a number of crimes are classified as terrorism statutes, or “federal crimes of terrorism,” more often than not, experts said, the charges associated with domestic terrorism cases are standard federal charges, such as murder or assault.
But the classification affects federal inquiries from the outset, including which unit investigates a particular target and the types of warrants available to federal agents. Officials referring to investigative targets and pending prosecutions will sometimes use the phrase domestic terrorism.
Thomas E. Brzozowski, who was the counsel for domestic terrorism at the Justice Department from 2015 to 2025, said in an interview that officials had previously been cautious when using the term.
Prosecutors during his time at the Justice Department made sure that public statements using the term “were done in a principled, consistent, uniform fashion.”
“The second you start deploying the term arbitrarily and capriciously before all the facts come in you lose trust,” he said, adding, “And then the next time you characterize something as domestic terrorism, even when it really is, people simply don’t believe you anymore.”
A spokeswoman for the White House, Abigail Jackson, did not directly respond to questions about the use of the term domestic terrorism in relation to Ms. Good and Mr. Pretti.
What is the legal definition of domestic terrorism?
The formal legal definition is relatively new. It became law shortly after the Sept. 11 attacks, as part of the Patriot Act.
The term refers to activities involving “acts dangerous to human life” that violate criminal laws, and that “appear to be intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination or kidnapping.”
To be considered domestic terrorism, the acts must occur “primarily” within U.S. jurisdiction.
Investigations are classified as related to domestic terrorism early in the process. After a preliminary inquiry, the F.B.I. typically categorizes a particular investigation as domestic terrorism and assigns it to the appropriate team.
Once suspects are formally charged, prosecutors may refer to them as having engaged in domestic terrorism. But the classification affects defendants most during sentencing, when prosecutors can ask for terrorism-related “enhancements” that extend the duration of a prison sentence.
Federal officials have considered some of the last decade’s most high-profile acts of violence to be domestic terrorism, including the mass shooting at a Pittsburgh synagogue in 2018 and another targeting Latinos at a Walmart in Texas in 2019.
Many of those charged in connection with the attack on the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, were not sentenced as domestic terrorists. But several convicted of the most severe crimes were, including Enrique Tarrio, the former Proud Boys leader who was sentenced to 22 years in prison. He was pardoned last year by President Trump.
How have key Trump administration officials used the term?
Since his return to office, Mr. Trump and top officials in his administration have been focused on their own definition.
“They specifically see domestic terrorism as a problem of the political left,” said Shirin Sinnar, a professor at Stanford Law School who is working on a book about the legal history of terrorism in the United States.
Stephen Miller, the president’s homeland security adviser, has been one of the most enthusiastic proponents of that view. In May, responding to a San Diego city councilman who had referred to Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents as terrorists, Mr. Miller countered, “We are living in the age of left-wing domestic terrorism.”
“They are openly encouraging violence against law enforcement to aid and abet the invasion of America,” Mr. Miller said.
In September, shortly after issuing an executive order that classified antifa as a domestic terrorist organization, Mr. Trump sent a formal memo to key agency heads on the subject. It wove together the killing of the conservative activist Charlie Kirk, the two assassination attempts on Mr. Trump and, crucially, “attacks on U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.”
And the memo called on the Joint Terrorism Task Forces to investigate people “engaged in acts of political violence and intimidation designed to suppress lawful political activity or obstruct the rule of law,” as well as those funding them.
Progress was to be reported directly to Mr. Miller.
How has that played out after the Minneapolis killings?
Ms. Good was fatally shot by an ICE agent, Jonathan Ross, on Jan. 7, while in her S.U.V. Many Americans reacted in horror to the shooting. Administration officials argued that it was justified, saying that Mr. Ross had feared for his life.
Mr. Miller posted a clip of the episode, captioned with the two-word phrase “domestic terrorism.” The head of the Homeland Security Department, Kristi Noem, called Ms. Good’s actions “domestic terrorism.” Vice President JD Vance characterized them as “classic terrorism.”
The official response was similar after federal agents fatally shot Mr. Pretti on Saturday. Ms. Noem called him a “domestic terrorist,” and said he had been seeking “to inflict maximum damage on individuals and to kill law enforcement,” comments contradicted by video analysis by The New York Times and others.
The comments have been met with fury. “They were calling her a domestic terrorist before they even knew what her name was,” said one of Minnesota’s Democratic senators, Tina Smith.
“President Trump’s response has remained consistent throughout this entire situation,” Ms. Jackson, the White House spokeswoman, said Wednesday. “He views Mr. Pretti’s death as a tragedy and has advocated for a fact-based investigation. And President Trump also views the deaths of countless innocent Americans at the hands of criminal illegal aliens as a tragedy that should warrant equal coverage.”
She pointed to comments that Mr. Trump had previously made about Ms. Good.
“I would bet you that she, under normal circumstances, was a very solid, wonderful person, but her actions were pretty tough,” Mr. Trump said.
Alan Feuer contributed reporting.
Jonah E. Bromwich covers criminal justice in the New York region for The Times. He is focused on political influence and its effect on the rule of law in the area’s federal and state courts.
The post White House Use of ‘Domestic Terrorist’ Doesn’t Match Legal Reality appeared first on New York Times.
