Why the Federal Government Can't Charge Anyone With 'Domestic Terrorism'

The article centers on a legal-technical fact: federal law defines domestic terrorism but lacks a specific statute for prosecution. Reason's framing emphasizes this legal gap in a way that implicitly challenges expansionist government power—a libertarian concern—without inflammatory language. The piece uses precise legal terminology and avoids charged adjectives, though the structural focus on governmental inability has an implicit anti-expansionist tilt consistent with Reason's editorial orientation.

Primary voices: academic or expert

• This article does not address proposals to create a federal domestic terrorism statute or the political debate surrounding such proposals
• This article does not explain how domestic terrorism prosecutions occur under existing federal statutes (e.g., material support, seditious conspiracy)