Florida Governor Ron DeSantis issued a proclamation on December 9th wherein he made both the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Muslim Brotherhood foreign terrorist organizations in Florida. The Governor’s announcement was made via social media (X, previously Twitter) and comes on the heels of increasing scrutiny by the United States toward organizations deemed to be associated with extremist activity. Following this proclamation, various communities, elected officials, and civil rights defenders have raised concerns about these designations.
The federal designation has preceded the state designation. President Donald Trump posted an executive order on November 4th instructing the federal government to begin designating Muslim Brotherhood-affiliated entities as terrorist organisations. Although the executive order does not automatically result in a federally-approved designation, it establishes a process under which the government will review requests for designation. Florida has followed this federal trend with their action; however, it is important to keep in mind that state terrorism designations and federal terrorism designations are handled differently throughout the U.S. legal system.
State vs. Federal Terrorism Lists: Key Differences
Typically, in the United States, organisations that are designated as terrorists will generally have that done at the Federal level by organisations such as the Department of State or the Treasury Department. These designations carry with them a considerable amount of legal authority, including sanctioning organisations and their representatives, freezing any assets owned by those organisations, and imposing criminal penalties for providing support.
State designations, such as Florida’s, do not necessarily impose Federal penalties; however, they may affect the way State Agencies engage with the designated organisation. For example, designating a terrorist organisation at the state level may eliminate a state entity from receiving state contracts, or may change how law enforcement in a state deals with the designated organization. It is important to note that State lists do not replace or supersede Federal lists; rather, they reflect the needs and priorities of the State Government.
Keep Reading
Legal and Social Implications
The decision made by Florida has prompted a debate on several fronts, including civil liberties, religious freedom, and national security. Proponents of this decision argue that this step is important to address organisations that they feel may be a security concern. Opponents of this designation caution that it could lead to an entire community being stigmatised and that the designation may not have sufficient legal standing since it is not accompanied by Federal support. Some civil rights organisations are also concerned that if State Governments follow Florida’s lead in designating organisations as terrorists, it could lead to fractured, inconsistent and fragmented approaches to policy on a nationwide basis.
The State of Florida’s classification of both the Muslim Brotherhood and CAIR as terrorists is better understood within the framework of larger Federal initiatives or historical discussions pertaining to terrorism. In Florida, Executive Explosion V2 and other security measures imposed by the Governor and Board of Governors in response to ongoing executive order initiatives have been followed by various legal and social matters. In order to fully appreciate how designation of an organisation as a terrorist impacts civil liberties, government and people’s ability to access social service,s you must first understand what each designation means within the context of the terrorist designation lists of both the federal government and the state governments.
