The FBI has asked local law enforcement to submit suspected cartel and gang members for inclusion on the U.S. terrorist watch list, marking the first time this counterterrorism tool could be used against domestic criminal organizations.
At a Glance
- FBI request seeks names of cartel and gang suspects from local police
- Trump administration designated eight gangs as foreign terrorist organizations in early 2025
- Watch list expansion could include U.S. citizens and relatives
- Civil liberties groups warn of due process and oversight issues
- Mexico and Venezuela criticize the move as a sovereignty violation
Expanding the Counterterrorism Framework
On May 9, 2025, the FBI contacted local law enforcement agencies via the National Sheriffs’ Association, requesting names of individuals suspected of ties to newly designated terrorist organizations, including MS-13 and Tren de Aragua. The watch list—established after the September 11, 2001 attacks—has historically targeted foreign terrorism threats, but this is the first formal step toward including domestic criminal suspects linked to cartels and gangs.
The move follows President Trump’s January 2025 executive order classifying certain cartels as foreign terrorist organizations. In February 2025, the State Department formally designated eight gangs under this framework. This policy shift recasts drug cartels and transnational gangs from criminal enterprises into national security threats, allowing federal agencies to deploy expanded legal and operational authorities traditionally reserved for counterterrorism operations.
Watch now: FBI Expands Terror Watch List to Include Cartel Suspects · YouTube
Watch List Implications and Oversight Concerns
Including suspected cartel affiliates on the terrorist watch list means that American citizens could be subject to heightened federal surveillance, travel restrictions, and investigative measures. In some cases, the list can also include family members or associates of targeted individuals.
Civil liberties advocates are raising concerns. Hina Shamsi of the ACLU’s National Security Project warned that such a broad expansion, without judicial review, risks government overreach and the wrongful inclusion of innocent people. The Electronic Frontier Foundation expressed alarm over the lack of transparency and limited avenues for challenging watch list placement. Critics emphasize that the Justice Department has not formally clarified its position on these changes, leaving uncertainty about how oversight will be maintained.
Supporters, such as former Department of Homeland Security Secretary Chad Wolf, argue that the new approach provides essential tools to counter violent cartels responsible for large-scale fentanyl trafficking and cross-border violence. They contend that the threat posed by these organizations justifies applying counterterrorism measures to dismantle them.
International Repercussions
The expanded designations have prompted diplomatic friction. Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum reiterated her country’s sovereignty, rejecting any possibility of U.S. military action on Mexican soil. Venezuela’s foreign minister dismissed the U.S. allegations against Tren de Aragua as politically driven.
These reactions reflect the broader geopolitical implications of treating criminal groups as terrorist entities. The classification enables the U.S. to use counterterrorism laws to freeze assets, expand intelligence-sharing, and authorize more aggressive cross-border operations. However, it also risks escalating tensions with governments that view such actions as infringements on national sovereignty.
By reframing cartel activity as a terrorism issue, the administration is signaling a long-term shift in U.S. security policy—one that could normalize applying counterterrorism powers to criminal organizations inside and outside U.S. borders.
