Redefining protest as terrorism

PRESIDENT TRUMP's executive order designating antifa as a "domestic terrorist organization" was never really about antifa. It was about building a template for repression. Now, with his latest order on "Countering Domestic Terrorism and Organized Political Violence," the blueprint is clear: free expression, political dissent and municipal autonomy are in the crosshairs.

- JASON M. BLAZAKIS GUEST CONTRIBUTOR

SPENCER PLATT Getty Images A RECENT executive order opens the door to weaponizing federal law enforcement against the president's political opponents.

I've argued in the past that the antifa order was legally flimsy and practically unnecessary. Antifa is not a structured organization. It's more an idea than an entity; a loose coalition of individuals dedicated to countering fascism. And while some have crossed the line from peaceful protesters to violent agitators, violence already has ample legal remedies under state and federal law. The danger of the order is in its symbolism, as the administration begins to stress-test just how far it could go in labeling domestic opponents as enemies of the state.

This new executive order goes much further. Cloaked in the language of protecting Americans from terrorism, it opens the door to weaponizing federal law enforcement against the right's political rivals. The Justice Department is now directed to treat broad swaths of dissent in Democratic-led cities, from Los Angeles to Portland, Ore., to Chicago, as "organized political violence." In practice, this could mean turning Joint Terrorism Task Forces entities designed to track designated foreign terrorist organizations such as AI Qaeda and Islamic State inward on Americans, investigating protest organizers, city officials, charities and journalists whose views run counter to the administration's agenda.

That should alarm every American. The task forces bring the full investigative powers of the FBI, Homeland Security and state and local law enforcement together under one umbrella. Using those tools to surveil political opponents would chill lawful protest and erode civil liberties.