Pocan, Huffman, Jayapal to Lead Letter to Trump Slamming Executive Order Targeting Protected Speech

WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Representatives Mark Pocan (WI-02), Jared Huffman (CA-02), and Pramila Jayapal (WA-07) are leading a letter to President Trump, expressing grave concerns regarding his executive order Designating Antifa as a Domestic Terrorist Organization and the related memorandum Countering Domestic Terrorism and Organized Political Violence, also known as NSPM-7, and demanding they be immediately rescinded.

These directives dangerously conflate constitutionally protected speech and political dissent with terrorism. The memo specifically targets ideologies such as “anti-capitalism,” “anti-Christianity,” and “hostility toward those who hold traditional American views,” raising serious First Amendment, due process, and civil liberties concerns.

The letter is currently circulating with House offices, but excerpts are below. 

“While protecting public safety and countering genuine threats are essential responsibilities of government, the sweeping language and broad authority in these directives pose serious constitutional, statutory, and civil liberties risks, especially if used to target political dissent, protest, or ideological speech,” the Members wrote. 

“Your memo uses ideologically charged language (e.g., “hostility toward those who hold traditional American views on family, religion, and morality”) that invites enforcement based on an individual’s personal opinions or political beliefs rather than any objective concern for public safety,” the Members continued. “This approach threatens our constituents’ civil liberties. Regardless of whether the President agrees with someone’s political views, the Constitution guarantees their right to speak and assemble peacefully. 

“The memo also characterizes ‘anti-capitalism’ as a hallmark of violent behavior without explaining the term,” the Members go on to say. “This omission allows officials to potentially treat Americans as domestic terrorists for something as routine as organizing a local boycott or operating an employee-owned business. That lack of clarity threatens to chill lawful activism and punish economic alternatives.

“Additionally, the memo's inclusion of “anti-Christianity” as a concern implies that criticism of Christian doctrines or institutions may qualify as violent behavior,” the Members continued. “This framing conflicts with the Constitution’s guarantee of religious freedom and its prohibition against government favoritism toward any faith. Non-Christian religious communities, secular groups, and individual dissenters all have the right to express disagreement with religious doctrines without being treated as threats…Labeling criticism as “anti-Christian” would silence their voices and deter Americans from exercising their rights. This risk becomes especially acute if enforcement shifts from protecting religious freedom to penalizing dissent from certain traditions. 

“While the threat of political violence demands vigilance, your administration must not use this moment to undermine the very constitutional and democratic principles we are sworn to uphold. These actions are illegal, and we demand you immediately rescind both the memorandum and the executive order. We stand ready to take legislative action should you fail to do so,” the Members concluded.