Designating Cartels and Other Organizations as Foreign Terrorist Organizations and Specially Designated Global Terrorists
In Simple Terms
The President has labeled certain cartels and groups as terrorists. This means the U.S. can take stronger actions against them.
Summary
On January 20, 2025, President Donald Trump issued Executive Order 14157, which establishes a process to designate certain international cartels and organizations as Foreign Terrorist Organizations or Specially Designated Global Terrorists. This action is based on their involvement in activities that pose a significant national security threat to the United States, including drug trafficking, violence, and infiltration into foreign governments. The order highlights the need to protect the U.S. from these threats by eliminating the presence of such organizations within the country and ensuring they cannot threaten U.S. territory or safety. The Secretary of State, in consultation with other key officials, is tasked with recommending which groups should receive these designations.
Official Record
Federal Register PublishedSigned by the President
January 20, 2025
January 29, 2025
Document #2025-02004
Analysis & Impact
💡 How This May Affect You
This executive order designates certain international cartels and organizations as Foreign Terrorist Organizations (FTOs) or Specially Designated Global Terrorists (SDGTs). This designation aims to address national security threats posed by these groups, which are involved in activities such as drug trafficking and violence. Here's how this action could impact different groups of Americans:
Working Families and Individuals
- Safety and Security: The order seeks to reduce violence and drug-related crime, potentially leading to safer communities. For families living in areas affected by cartel-related activities, this could mean less crime and a more secure environment.
- Drug Availability: By targeting cartels, the availability of illegal drugs might decrease, potentially leading to lower rates of drug addiction and related health issues.
Small Business Owners
- Security Improvements: Small businesses, particularly those in areas affected by cartel activities, might experience a safer business environment, reducing the risk of crime and vandalism.
- Economic Impact: If the order successfully disrupts illegal drug trade networks, there might be a positive economic impact as communities become safer and more attractive for business investments.
Students and Recent Graduates
- Community Safety: Schools and universities in areas affected by cartel violence might see improved safety, which can enhance the learning environment.
- Job Opportunities: If the order leads to economic improvements in affected areas, it might create more job opportunities for recent graduates as businesses feel more secure to expand.
Retirees and Seniors
- Community Stability: Retirees living in areas impacted by cartel activities might experience more stable and peaceful communities, which can contribute to a better quality of life.
- Healthcare Access: A reduction in drug-related health issues might ease the burden on healthcare systems, potentially improving access for seniors.
Different Geographic Regions
- Urban Areas: Cities that are hubs for drug trafficking might see a decrease in related crime and violence, improving overall urban safety and quality of life.
- Suburban Areas: These areas might experience indirect benefits from improved safety and reduced drug availability, contributing to community well-being.
- Rural Areas: Rural regions near the border or those used as drug trafficking routes might see significant changes, with potential decreases in crime and increased law enforcement presence.
Practical Implications
- Law Enforcement: Increased law enforcement activities might be seen in areas heavily impacted by cartel operations, potentially leading to more community-police interactions.
- Legal and Immigration Issues: The designation might lead to stricter immigration controls and legal actions against individuals associated with these organizations, impacting communities with large immigrant populations.
Overall, the executive order aims to enhance national security by targeting organizations that pose significant threats. While it could lead to safer communities and economic improvements in affected areas, it might also result in increased law enforcement activities and stricter immigration enforcement. These changes could have varying impacts across different regions and demographic groups in the U.S.
🏢 Key Stakeholders
Primary Beneficiaries:
U.S. Law Enforcement Agencies: Agencies such as the DEA, FBI, and ICE will benefit from increased legal tools and resources to combat cartels and transnational criminal organizations. This designation empowers them to pursue more aggressive strategies and secure additional funding for operations against these entities.
Local Communities in Border Areas: Communities along the U.S.-Mexico border may experience enhanced safety and security as a result of intensified efforts to dismantle cartels and reduce cross-border crime. This could lead to a decrease in drug-related violence and other criminal activities.
Stakeholders Facing Challenges:
International Cartels and Criminal Organizations: Groups like the Mexican cartels, TdA, and MS-13 will face increased scrutiny, sanctions, and law enforcement actions, potentially disrupting their operations and financial networks.
Immigrant Communities: There may be unintended consequences for immigrant communities, including increased deportations and heightened scrutiny, which could lead to fears of racial profiling and civil rights violations.
Industries, Sectors, or Professions Most Impacted:
Legal and Financial Sectors: Law firms and financial institutions may need to enhance their compliance and due diligence processes to avoid facilitating transactions with designated entities, impacting their operations and client relationships.
Security and Defense Contractors: Companies in these sectors may see increased demand for their services as government agencies seek additional resources and technology to combat terrorist-designated organizations.
Government Agencies or Departments Involved:
Department of State: Responsible for the formal designation of organizations as Foreign Terrorist Organizations, impacting diplomatic relations and international cooperation efforts.
Department of Treasury: Plays a critical role in enforcing financial sanctions and blocking assets of designated entities, affecting their financial operations and international transactions.
Interest Groups, Advocacy Organizations, or Lobbies with Strong Positions:
Human Rights Organizations: Groups like the ACLU may express concerns about civil liberties and the potential for increased racial profiling or unjust detentions under the expanded enforcement measures.
Drug Policy Reform Advocates: Organizations advocating for drug policy reform might argue that the focus on criminalization and enforcement could overshadow efforts to address the root causes of drug trafficking and consumption.
Each stakeholder group has a vested interest in the outcomes of this executive order, whether it is through enhanced capabilities to combat crime, concerns about civil liberties, or the impact on international relations and business operations.
📈 What to Expect
Short-term (3-12 months):
Immediate Implementation Steps:
- Within two weeks, the Secretary of State, in coordination with the Treasury, Justice, Homeland Security, and Intelligence, will begin identifying and recommending cartels and organizations for designation as Foreign Terrorist Organizations (FTOs) or Specially Designated Global Terrorists (SDGTs).
- The Attorney General and Homeland Security will prepare for potential legal and operational actions, including utilizing the Alien Enemies Act for expedited removals.
- Initial steps will likely include increased intelligence gathering, diplomatic communications with affected countries, and interagency coordination to ensure a unified approach.
Early Visible Changes or Effects:
- Increased law enforcement operations targeting identified cartels and organizations, potentially resulting in high-profile arrests and asset seizures.
- Heightened border security measures and scrutiny of financial transactions linked to these groups.
- Diplomatic tensions may arise with countries where these organizations operate, particularly if perceived as infringing on their sovereignty or if cooperation is lacking.
Potential Initial Reactions or Challenges:
- Legal challenges from civil rights organizations concerned about the broad application of terrorist designations and potential civil liberties violations.
- Pushback from countries in the Western Hemisphere, particularly Mexico, if the designations are seen as unilateral or damaging to bilateral relations.
- Possible retaliatory actions from designated groups, including increased violence or cyber-attacks, as they seek to undermine U.S. efforts.
Long-term (1-4 years):
Broader Systemic Changes:
- A shift in U.S. foreign policy and law enforcement priorities, with increased focus and resources allocated to combatting these organizations as part of national security strategy.
- Potential reconfiguration of international cooperation frameworks, with new alliances and partnerships to address the transnational nature of these threats.
Cumulative Effects on Society, Economy, or Policy Landscape:
- Reduction in drug trafficking and related violence in the U.S. could be a significant positive outcome, improving public safety and reducing healthcare costs associated with drug abuse.
- Economic impacts on regions heavily reliant on illicit economies, potentially prompting economic instability or migration pressures.
- Strengthened legal frameworks and precedents for addressing non-state actors as national security threats, potentially influencing future policy on terrorism and organized crime.
Potential for Modification, Expansion, or Reversal by Future Administrations:
- Future administrations might modify or expand the scope of this policy based on its effectiveness and public or international response. This could include refining the criteria for designation or adjusting enforcement strategies.
- Alternatively, if the policy leads to significant diplomatic fallout or domestic legal challenges, there could be a reversal or scaling back of designations, particularly if perceived as overreach or ineffective.
- The policy's legacy will depend on measurable outcomes in terms of reduced cartel influence and improved security, which will influence its durability and adaptability in future administrations.
📚 Historical Context
The executive order designating international cartels and other organizations as Foreign Terrorist Organizations (FTOs) and Specially Designated Global Terrorists (SDGTs) represents a significant shift in U.S. policy towards combating organized crime. This action can be contextualized by examining similar historical actions and policies by previous administrations, as well as the broader patterns of American governance regarding national security and foreign policy.
Historical Precedents:
War on Drugs and Organized Crime:
- The "War on Drugs," initiated by President Richard Nixon in the early 1970s, marked the beginning of a concerted federal effort to combat drug trafficking and related criminal organizations. Subsequent administrations, particularly under President Ronald Reagan in the 1980s, intensified these efforts with increased law enforcement and international cooperation.
- The designation of drug cartels as terrorist organizations echoes the strategies used during this period, reflecting a continuity in the approach to treating drug-related violence as a national security issue.
Terrorism Designations:
- The legal framework for designating groups as FTOs was established with the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 under President Bill Clinton. This allowed the U.S. government to target foreign organizations that engage in terrorist activities.
- President George W. Bush expanded the use of such designations post-9/11 with Executive Order 13224, which targeted individuals and entities that supported terrorism financially. The current executive order builds upon this framework by applying it to international drug cartels.
Use of Executive Orders for National Security:
- Presidents have historically utilized executive orders to address national security threats swiftly. For instance, President Franklin D. Roosevelt's Executive Order 9066 during World War II, although controversial, highlighted the executive branch's power to act decisively in perceived emergencies.
- This order follows a similar pattern, using executive authority to declare a national emergency and take immediate action against perceived threats.
Building Upon, Modifying, or Reversing Existing Policies:
- This executive order builds upon existing policies by expanding the criteria for FTO and SDGT designations to include international cartels, which traditionally have been treated as criminal organizations rather than terrorist entities. This represents a significant policy evolution, recognizing the complex and violent nature of these groups as akin to terrorist organizations.
- It modifies existing policies by integrating national security tools, such as the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), to address the multifaceted threats posed by these organizations, thereby broadening the scope of U.S. counterterrorism and anti-crime strategies.
Unique and Noteworthy Aspects:
- Integration of National Security and Criminal Justice:
- The executive order uniquely merges national security and criminal justice approaches, reflecting the increasingly blurred lines between terrorism and organized crime in the globalized world.
- Focus on Western Hemisphere Stability:
- By emphasizing the destabilizing impact of cartels in the Western Hemisphere, the order underscores a regional focus that aligns with historical U.S. interests in maintaining stability in its neighboring regions.
- Potential for Diplomatic and Legal Challenges:
- The designation of cartels as terrorist organizations could lead to diplomatic tensions, particularly with countries like Mexico, where these groups operate. It may also pose legal challenges regarding the treatment of individuals associated with these organizations under U.S. and international law.
In summary, this executive order represents a continuation and expansion of historical U.S. strategies to combat organized crime and terrorism, adapting to contemporary threats by leveraging national security frameworks. It is a noteworthy development in American governance, reflecting evolving perceptions of security threats and the tools used to address them.
Related Actions
Jan 29, 2025
FREnding Radical and Wasteful Government DEI Programs and Preferencing
Jan 29, 2025
FREstablishing and Implementing the President's "Department of Government Efficiency"
Jan 29, 2025
FR