Security clearance denial, due to association with radical groups

In recent months the nation has been rocked by violent riots in major metropolitan areas - perpetuated by far-left and far-right extremist elements. There have been several indicators that federal employees, as well as, federal contractors having been involved in acts of violence, and or expressing support for acts of violence, against innocent civilians, law enforcement personnel, as well as other government entities, and even against privately owned businesses. How will this affect a persons security clearance or public trust position? The act of domestic terrorism is defined as the following:

Violent, criminal acts committed by individuals and/or groups to further ideological goals stemming from domestic influences, such as those of a political, religious, social, racial, or environmental nature. Source

Will federal contractors and employees who are identified as being active participants or supporters of such actions be subject to having their clearance denied / revoked and will they face domestic terror charges? What are your thoughts on the subject.

This is a question asked during SF interviews and of sources.

Trouble is very few believe the group to which they support or take part in is radical. Messages these days from such groups indicate their radical ideas either are, or soon will be, mainstream and logical. How is that then viewed as radical to the group member?

It becomes a definition of is…

If a fed employee/contractor was charged with domestic terror THEN he/she most likely will loose the clearance. Also, domestic terror charge warrants to seek revocation of US citizenship if fed employee/contractor acquired that by naturalization.

This is true. People can’t recognize their radical extremist views, but common sense that investigators hopefully have will recognize if a person is radical, or supports radical ideologies. We see so much political extremism from both sides that it is now a question of how this is going to affect the vetting process. Of course, many are already being charged with serious crimes related to their actions. I just hope they start getting charged on domestic terror charges since that is what is going on especially in Portland.

Along with the top-level politicians who collaborated with Russian GRU officers.

1 Like

Domestic terrorism is defined as: Violent, criminal acts committed by individuals and/or groups to further ideological goals stemming from domestic influences, such as those of a political, religious, social, racial, or environmental nature. Source:

You’re not up to speed on federal statutes. Nobody can face domestic terrorism charges as the US doesn’t even have a domestic terrorism law.

The US has a definition of domestic terrorism? Cool story. Now back it up with a legal statute.


Section 802 of the USA PATRIOT Act (Pub. L. No. 107-52) expanded the definition of terrorism to cover ““domestic,”” as opposed to international, terrorism. A person engages in domestic terrorism if they do an act “dangerous to human life” that is a violation of the criminal laws of a state or the United States, if the act appears to be intended to: (i) intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination or kidnapping. Additionally, the acts have to occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States and if they do not, may be regarded as international terrorism.

Section 802 does not create a new crime of domestic terrorism. However, it does expand the type of conduct that the government can investigate when it is investigating “terrorism.” The USA PATRIOT Act expanded governmental powers to investigate terrorism, and some of these powers are applicable to domestic terrorism.

The definition of domestic terrorism is broad enough to encompass the activities of several prominent activist campaigns and organizations. Greenpeace, Operation Rescue, Vieques Island and WTO protesters and the Environmental Liberation Front have all recently engaged in activities that could subject them to being investigated as engaging in domestic terrorism


What is your point in this thread? You’re simply quoting definitions of terrorism and expansions thereof.

18 U.S. Code § 2331 - look it up.

Why so angry HARPOON? I sure hope you don’t support such things. My question was fair and relevant given all the domestic terror activities taking place across the nation lately. I have seen some federal employee on social media voicing support and even taking part in some cases. How will that affect their clearance? And in case you weren’t aware: The FBI has opened more than 300 domestic terrorism investigations since late May and arrested nearly 100 people in Portland, Oregon, a focal point of the George Floyd protests, a top federal prosecutor said on Tuesday. Source:

@HARPOON is right there is no such thing as a charge with domestic terrorism, so in technicality no such crime as terrorism actually exists according to U.S.statute. Domestic terrorists are not convicted of “terrorism” per se, but rather are convicted of the accompanying crimes, such as murder, weapons violations. Take a look at the charges against Boston bomber


Now you’re just trolling.

1 Like