What Is Political Violence: Federal Penalties and Victim Recovery

Political violence is the use of physical force, or the credible threat of it, to achieve a political objective: coercing a population, influencing government policy, or forcing a change in who holds power. Under federal law, acts that endanger human life and are intended to intimidate civilians or influence government conduct meet the statutory definition of domestic terrorism, and prosecutors can bring charges carrying sentences from one year to life in prison depending on what was done and who was harmed.

The Federal Definition

There is no single statute titled “political violence,” but 18 U.S.C. § 2331 defines domestic terrorism in terms that capture most of what the phrase means. The statute covers activities that are dangerous to human life, violate federal or state criminal law, and appear intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population, influence government policy through intimidation or coercion, or affect government conduct through mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping, all occurring primarily within U.S. territory.¹

Read that definition carefully and the key becomes clear: intent. A bombing is a crime whatever the motive. But when the bomber’s goal is to coerce the public or force a change in government policy, the act crosses into domestic terrorism, and a different set of federal charges and harsher penalties come into play.

Federal law does not require membership in any organization. A single person acting alone on a political grievance can meet the definition, and federal prosecutors have increasingly brought charges on that basis.

How It Differs From a Hate Crime

Political violence and hate crimes get mixed up often, and they are legally distinct. Federal hate crime law targets violence motivated by bias against a victim’s race, color, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability.² Political violence is defined instead by the perpetrator’s desire to influence political outcomes.¹

The two can overlap. An attack on a religious community carried out to destabilize a political system could qualify as both. The core legal question differs, though: a hate crime prosecution asks whether bias against a protected characteristic drove the act, while a terrorism prosecution asks whether the act was intended to coerce civilians or influence government. Penalties differ too. A federal hate crime conviction carries up to 10 years in prison, or life imprisonment if the victim dies.² Terrorism-related charges often run longer, with seditious conspiracy alone punishable by up to 20 years.³

The Forms Political Violence Takes

Political violence takes recognizably different shapes depending on who is carrying it out, who they are targeting, and what they want.

Terrorism. Violence or threats designed to create fear in a population much larger than the immediate victims, aimed at coercing the public or a government. The 1995 Oklahoma City bombing and the September 11, 2001 attacks remain the most devastating examples on U.S. soil.
Political assassination. The targeted killing of a political figure to eliminate leadership, send a message, or destabilize a government. The killings of President Abraham Lincoln in 1865 and President John F. Kennedy in 1963 reshaped American politics. Assassination attempts against a sitting congressman at a 2017 charity baseball practice and against a presidential candidate in 2024 show the threat persists.
Insurgency. An organized armed rebellion against a government, often using guerrilla tactics like ambushes, sabotage, and hit-and-run operations to undermine political authority over time.
State repression. Violence carried out by a government against its own people to crush dissent or maintain control, including extrajudicial killings, torture, and mass detention of political opponents. Domestic examples include the violent suppression of labor movements and civil rights protests throughout American history.
Civil war. Prolonged armed conflict within a country, usually between a government and organized opposition fighting over political control, territory, or the structure of the state itself.
Politically motivated riots and civil disorder. Violent disturbances driven by political grievances, such as the January 6, 2021 breach of the U.S. Capitol, where a crowd stormed the building in an attempt to disrupt certification of a presidential election.

These categories are not airtight. A single event can combine several of them, such as an assassination carried out by an insurgent group during a civil war, or a terrorist attack that triggers wider civil disorder.

Who Carries It Out

Perpetrators fall into two broad camps. State actors include governments, military forces, and law enforcement agencies that use violence to suppress political opposition or enforce authoritarian policies. When a government turns its security apparatus against its own citizens for political reasons, that is state-sponsored political violence whether or not the government calls it “law enforcement” or “national security.”

Non-state actors run from organized militant groups to loosely affiliated extremists to individuals acting entirely alone. The FBI and Department of Homeland Security sort domestic violent extremism into several threat types:

Racially or ethnically motivated violent extremism. Violence driven by racial or ethnic bias, including white supremacist ideology and violent interpretations of racial justice grievances.⁴
Anti-government or anti-authority violent extremism. Violence rooted in opposition to perceived government overreach, illegitimacy, or corruption. The 2020 plot to kidnap a sitting governor is one example.⁴
Animal rights and environmental violent extremism. Violence aimed at ending perceived exploitation of animals or natural resources, such as arson attacks against research laboratories.
Abortion-related violent extremism. Violence carried out by individuals on either side of the abortion debate, including attacks on clinics and providers.⁴

DHS separates domestic violent extremists from “homegrown violent extremists,” a term reserved for people based in the United States who are inspired by foreign terrorist organizations but act independently of their direction.⁵ Both categories count as political violence, but the distinction shapes how law enforcement investigates and prosecutes.

Where Protected Speech Ends

Not every inflammatory political speech or social media post is political violence. The First Amendment protects a wide range of political expression, including speech many people find offensive or extreme. The Supreme Court drew the constitutional line in Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969), holding that the government cannot punish advocacy of illegal action unless the speech is both directed at producing imminent lawless action and likely to actually produce it.⁶

Both parts of the test matter. A political leader giving an abstract speech about the virtues of revolution at some undefined future time is protected. A person standing in front of an armed crowd and directing them to attack a specific target right now is not. The question is always whether the speech is producing an immediate, concrete risk of unlawful action rather than expressing a general political philosophy. Saying something terrible is usually legal. Directing someone to commit violence, in circumstances where they are likely to do it immediately, is not.

Federal Penalties

Federal law offers several tools for prosecuting political violence, and the penalties scale with the severity of the act and its consequences.

Seditious Conspiracy

Conspiring to overthrow the government by force, wage war against the United States, or forcibly prevent the execution of federal law is punishable by up to 20 years in prison.³ This charge saw its most prominent use in decades after the January 6, 2021 Capitol breach. The leader of the Proud Boys was sentenced to 22 years in prison on seditious conspiracy and related charges, with other members receiving sentences ranging from 10 to 18 years.⁷

Terrorism Offenses

Using or attempting to use a weapon of mass destruction within the United States carries a potential sentence of any term of years up to life in prison. If anyone dies, the penalty can include the death penalty or life imprisonment.⁸ The same penalties apply to bombing government facilities, public transportation systems, or places of public use with intent to cause death or massive economic damage.

One nuance matters here. Federal law does not create a single standalone crime called “domestic terrorism.” The definition in 18 U.S.C. § 2331 serves as a framework. Prosecutors charge defendants with specific underlying offenses, such as conspiracy, weapons charges, or murder, and the terrorism designation affects sentencing enhancements and investigative authority rather than serving as a charge on its own.

Voter Intimidation and Attacks on Protected Activities

Using force or threats to prevent someone from voting, or to influence how they vote, in a federal election is a crime punishable by up to one year in prison.⁹ A separate federal law criminalizes using force to interfere with anyone because they are voting, serving on a jury, using federal programs, or holding employment with a federal agency.¹⁰

What Victims Can Recover

When someone is convicted of a federal crime involving political violence, courts are required to order restitution to victims. That includes the full value of any property damaged or destroyed, medical and rehabilitation costs for anyone who suffered bodily injury, lost income, and funeral expenses if anyone was killed. Courts must also order defendants to reimburse victims for expenses tied to participating in the investigation and prosecution, including lost wages and childcare costs during court proceedings.¹¹

Every state also runs a crime victim compensation program that reimburses victims of violent crimes for medical expenses, funeral costs, lost wages, and counseling. These programs typically cap total payments, with maximums varying by state. Compensation is separate from any restitution a court orders the offender to pay, and victims do not need a criminal conviction to apply; they only need to report the crime and cooperate with law enforcement. For victims of political violence facing expenses beyond what restitution covers, state compensation programs can fill some of the gap, though they rarely cover the full cost of a catastrophic attack.

1
Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 18 USC 2331 – Definitions
2
Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 18 USC 249 – Hate Crime Acts
3
Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 18 USC 2384 – Seditious Conspiracy
4
Federal Bureau of Investigation. Domestic Terrorism – Definitions, Terminology, and Methodology
5
Department of Homeland Security. Homeland Threat Assessment 2025
6
Library of Congress. Brandenburg v Ohio, 395 US 444 (1969)
7
U.S. Department of Justice. Proud Boys Leader Sentenced to 22 Years in Prison on Seditious Conspiracy and Other Charges
8
Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 18 USC Chapter 113B – Terrorism
9
Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 18 USC 594 – Intimidation of Voters
10
Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 18 USC 245 – Federally Protected Activities
11
Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 18 USC 3663A – Mandatory Restitution to Victims of Certain Crimes