Why Trump is planning a federal crackdown on liberal groups after Charlie Kirk’s killing

Charlie Kirk was fatally shot at an event in Utah University last week. (Courtesy: Reuters file photo)

In the days after conservative activist Charlie Kirk was assassinated in Utah, US President Donald Trump and senior officials pledged to use the federal government to crack down on what they called a left-wing network fomenting violence. The move, announced on Kirk’s own podcast—guest-hosted from the White House by US Vice President JD Vance—signalled a sweeping effort to classify liberal organizations as domestic threats, even as investigators have yet to identify a motive in the killing, the New York Times reported.

Utah’s governor has said the suspect acted alone and held a “leftist ideology.” But Trump and his allies have claimed without proof that the killing was part of a coordinated effort. They floated plans to designate groups such as antifa as domestic terrorists and to pursue racketeering charges against donors who support liberal causes. Trump singled out George Soros, renewing unfounded allegations that the Democratic donor funds violent protests. Critics warn the administration is using the tragedy as a pretext to stifle political opposition.

Two senior officials confirmed that cabinet members are mapping out ways to identify organizations accused of supporting violence against conservatives. Tactics under discussion include stripping nonprofits of tax-exempt status and prosecuting individuals under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act. Stephen Miller, Trump’s top policy adviser, vowed to “eliminate and destroy” what he described as a domestic terror network, promising to marshal resources across the Justice Department and Homeland Security.

Democratic lawmakers quickly pushed back. Senator Chris Murphy cautioned that instead of uniting Americans against violence, the White House was preparing “a campaign to destroy dissent.” Representative Greg Casar warned that Trump was ignoring right-wing attacks—including the hammer assault on Nancy Pelosi’s husband and the deadly January 6 insurrection—while weaponizing Kirk’s death to go after peaceful opponents. Civil liberties experts also questioned the legality of classifying broad ideological groups as terrorist organizations under U.S. law.

From the White House, Vice President Vance framed the crackdown as a moral mission, blaming “a lunatic fringe on the far left” for most political violence. He acknowledged that “our side has its crazies” but argued that Democrats had failed to rein in extremists. His appearance as guest host of Kirk’s show—broadcast across West Wing screens—underscored how the administration is turning grief into a rallying point for partisan mobilization.

Republican lawmakers echoed Trump’s rhetoric. Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene claimed “millions on the left” celebrated Kirk’s death and called for a “national divorce.” Representative Nancy Mace urged the Education Department to cut funding to schools that failed to discipline staff who mocked Kirk. Representative Derrick Van Orden publicly named private citizens who criticized the activist, urging their dismissal. These moves highlighted how Kirk’s murder has become both a political weapon and a catalyst for efforts to punish perceived opponents.

The administration’s push marks a continuation of earlier efforts to redirect federal resources against the left, despite law enforcement agencies’ warnings about right-wing extremism. A 2025 Homeland Security threat assessment emphasized that political violence in the United States is driven by multiple ideologies, not just one. Former officials stress that many attackers act from personal grievances and conspiracy theories rather than membership in any organized group. Critics say conflating dissent with terrorism risks undermining First Amendment protections while deepening the nation’s polarization.