U.S. President Donald Trump announced on 23 November 2025 that his administration has initiated a formal review to determine whether certain branches of the Muslim Brotherhood meet the legal criteria for designation under U.S. terrorism authorities. Trump described the effort as advancing “in the strongest and most powerful terms” and said that relevant documentation is nearing completion within the executive branch. As of 24 November 2025, the Muslim Brotherhood does not appear on the State Department’s official Foreign Terrorist Organization list, and no Federal Register notice has been issued. The current U.S. posture involves an evaluative process rather than a finalized designation.
According to public reporting and administration statements, the White House directive orders the Secretary of State and the Secretary of the Treasury to examine specific chapters of the Muslim Brotherhood, including those active in Egypt, Jordan, and Lebanon, and to determine whether any should be listed as Foreign Terrorist Organizations or Specially Designated Global Terrorists. The emphasis on individual chapters reflects the movement’s decentralized structure and long-standing debate within U.S. agencies over whether the Brotherhood can be treated as a single organization for purposes of U.S. law. The executive action does not guarantee a global, movement-wide designation; it establishes a process to assess distinct branches according to statutory thresholds.
The announcement coincided with a separate development in Texas, where Governor Greg Abbott issued a proclamation labeling the Muslim Brotherhood and the Council on American-Islamic Relations as foreign terrorist and transnational criminal organizations under Texas state authority. The proclamation carries implications for property oversight and enforcement actions within the state but does not have federal legal effect, as terrorism designations in the United States fall under federal jurisdiction. CAIR has rejected the claims and is preparing legal challenges, according to Texas-based reporting.
The Muslim Brotherhood, founded in Egypt in 1928 by Hassan al-Banna, developed over the past century into a transnational movement with branches, affiliated parties, charities, and social organizations across the Middle East, North Africa, Europe, and certain African states. The movement’s evolution produced a wide spectrum of national variants. Egypt designated the Brotherhood a terrorist organization in 2013 after the removal of President Mohamed Morsi, a status that remains central to its domestic political landscape. Ennahda in Tunisia, although historically influenced by Brotherhood thinking, repositioned itself in 2016 as a civil political party and moved away from “political Islam” framing. Libya’s Justice and Construction Party is frequently described by researchers as aligned with Brotherhood traditions, though the country’s fragmented political environment makes organizational boundaries difficult to define. Morocco’s Justice and Development Party is an Islamist party but is not structurally part of the Muslim Brotherhood, even if political discourse sometimes presents them together.
International precedents highlight how governments have approached the issue. The United Kingdom’s 2015 Jenkins Review criticized elements of the Brotherhood’s conduct but did not recommend proscription. The European Union does not maintain a collective designation of the movement, leaving such decisions to member states. These examples underscore the complexity of applying terrorism designation criteria to a movement whose branches differ markedly in structure, ideology, and political engagement.
Under U.S. law, a Foreign Terrorist Organization designation requires evidence that the entity is foreign, that it engages in terrorism or retains the capability and intent to do so, and that the designation advances American national security interests. Past debates inside U.S. agencies, documented in congressional discussions and independent analyses, noted the difficulty of applying these criteria to a decentralized network. The current review will require the State and Treasury Departments to distinguish between branches that may qualify for designation and those that operate as political parties or social organizations without documented involvement in violence.
Any future designation would follow a defined legal path. A Foreign Terrorist Organization listing must be published in the Federal Register and added to the State Department’s public list. A Specially Designated Global Terrorist listing would proceed through the Treasury Department under separate authority. Designations involving groups with political wings that participate in national parliaments would likely prompt diplomatic consultations with affected governments. There is also the possibility of litigation by U.S.-based organizations that argue indirect affiliation or raise constitutional concerns, although the scope of any challenge will depend on the final wording of the designation.
North African states will closely watch how Washington defines the scope of its review. Egypt is expected to welcome stronger U.S. measures, given its existing designation of the Brotherhood. Tunisia may face reputational and political sensitivities if the process is interpreted as applying broadly to movements historically associated with political Islam, despite Ennahda’s repositioning. In Libya, where multiple actors have ideological or historical links to Brotherhood currents, a U.S. designation affecting any chapter could influence political negotiations and external support networks. Morocco is unlikely to face direct policy implications unless the United States adopts highly expansive interpretative criteria that link ideological affinity with organizational structure.
As of late November 2025, the United States remains in an assessment phase. The review indicates a renewed interest in revisiting the federal posture toward certain Brotherhood branches, but any final determination will depend on the conclusions presented by the State and Treasury Departments in the coming weeks. If Washington proceeds with designations, the decision will shape diplomatic engagement with North African governments, affect internal political debates in states where Brotherhood-influenced parties operate, and define how U.S. counterterrorism policy approaches one of the region’s most politically consequential movements.
