When “Domestic Terrorist” Becomes A Verb

When “Domestic Terrorist” Becomes A Verb

The Jack Hopkins Now Newsletter #730: Monday, January 12th, 2026

There is a line that, once crossed…is very hard to uncross.

Not because laws disappear overnight.
Not because courts immediately collapse.
But because language changes first…and institutions quietly begin behaving as if the verdict has already been rendered.

That line was crossed when the Trump administration publicly labeled Renee Good a “domestic terrorist”…not after a trial…not after a conviction…not even after formal charges…but as part of the narrative defense for why ICE agents killed her.

That matters more than most people realize.

Because once the state claims the power to assign the most morally radioactive label in American life…after the fact…and use it to justify lethal force…something fundamental has shifted.

This isn’t just about Renee Good.
It’s about what happens when designation…replaces due process.

What Happened-And Why the Label Came First

According to the administration’s account, Renee Good was engaged in conduct they described as “domestic terrorism.”

That characterization was used by senior officials to explain…and defend…the actions of federal agents…involved in her death.

What is critical here is not adjudicating her guilt or innocence in this article. Courts exist for that. Evidence matters. Facts matter.

What does matter is the sequence:

1. A person is killed by federal agents.

2. The administration publicly applies the label “domestic terrorist.”

3. That label is then used to frame the killing as justified…before an independent legal process plays out.

In other words…the label didn’t follow due process.
It preceded it.

And once that happens…the label stops being descriptive…and becomes exculpatory; a rhetorical shield for state action.

Why “Domestic Terrorist” Is Not Just Another Insult

In American law, “domestic terrorism” is not a standalone criminal conviction…

…but socially and institutionally…it is one of the most powerful designations the government can apply.

Because the moment someone is called a “domestic terrorist,” several things happen simultaneously:

• The public is conditioned to view them as a legitimate target
• Skepticism toward state force collapses
• Media framing shifts from “what happened?” to “what did they do?”
• Due process begins to feel optional
• Extraordinary measures suddenly sound reasonable

This is why governments throughout history love the term.
It collapses moral complexity…into a single word.

And…once collapsed…violence becomes administratively explainable.

This Is the Authoritarian Shortcut

Authoritarian systems don’t usually begin by abolishing courts.

They begin by pre-judging enemies.

They begin by assigning labels…that make accountability feel unnecessary…and dissent feel dangerous.

The logic goes like this:

“We didn’t kill a citizen. We neutralized a threat.”
“We didn’t suppress dissent. We prevented extremism.”
“We didn’t violate rights. We protected public safety.”

Once that language becomes normalized…everything downstream follows.

What Makes This Moment Different

Presidents have used harsh rhetoric before.

Law enforcement…has overreached before.
Prosecutors…have abused discretion before.

But…what’s different…now…is how casually the label is being applied…and..how quickly it’s being used to justify irreversible outcomes.

There was no trial.
No conviction.
No jury.

Just a word…and a body.

That should stop people cold.

From One Case to a Pattern

If this were an isolated incident…it would still be alarming.

But…it isn’t.

We’ve watched a steady escalation in how dissent, protest, journalism, and institutional resistance are framed:

• Protesters become “extremists”
• Journalists become “enemies”
• Civil servants become “saboteurs”
• Regulators become “traitors”
• Judges become “corrupt”
• And now… individuals can become “terrorists” by assertion

This is not accidental. It is narrative conditioning.

The goal is not just to win arguments.
The goal…is to redefine who deserves protection.

Why This Terrifies Lawyers-Quietly

Most lawyers aren’t hysterical people.

They don’t speak in slogans. They don’t leap to conclusions.

But…privately…many understand the danger here immediately.

Because the moment the executive branch begins designating internal enemies rhetorically…institutions downstream begin to adapt:

• Agencies become more aggressive
• Judges feel political pressure
• Juries are pre-conditioned
• Financial institutions de-risk
• Platforms de-platform
• Employers disengage

None of this requires new laws.

It only requires…acceptance of the premise.

The Slippery Expansion Is Not Hypothetical

Ask yourself an uncomfortable question:

If the government can call Renee Good a domestic terrorist after her death…

What stops it from applying the same label to:

• Protest organizers
• Immigration advocates
• Climate activists
• Journalists publishing leaked material
• Whistleblowers
• Lawyers defending unpopular clients
• State officials resisting federal directives

The answer is supposed to be “the law.”

But…the law only works…if labels don’t substitute for findings.

Once labels become findings…the system rots from the inside.

Why Supporters Should Be Worried Too

This is the part many people miss.

Weaponized labels never stay confined to their original targets.

They expand.
They metastasize.
They get repurposed.

Today it’s someone you’ve never met.
Tomorrow it’s someone you agree with.
Eventually…it’s someone you voted for.

Power that is unrestrained by process…does not remain loyal.
It remains hungry.

This Is How Trust Dies

Trust in government doesn’t die because people disagree.

It dies…when citizens realize that outcomes are being justified…retroactively…by language rather than law.

When words…are used to erase accountability…rather than clarify truth.

When “terrorist” becomes a rhetorical solvent…that dissolves rights on contact.

At that point…people don’t just lose faith in leadership…they lose faith in the idea…that the system can protect them at all.

And once that faith is gone…instability is no longer theoretical.

What This Forces Us to Confront

You don’t have to decide today whether Renee Good…

…was innocent or guilty to recognize the danger here.

You only have to answer one question:

Do you want the government deciding who counts as a “terrorist” before a court does?

If the answer is no…then this moment matters.

Because precedents don’t announce themselves as precedents.
They show up as “exceptions.”
As “special cases.”
As “obvious situations.”

Until one day…they’re just how things work.

The Line That Must Be Held

Here is the line that cannot be surrendered:

Labels do not replace trials.
Narratives do not replace evidence.
Power does not replace law.

Once that line is crossed…even once…the country changes in ways that are very hard to reverse.

This isn’t about panic.
It’s about clarity.

And clarity…is what authoritarian systems fear most.

Because clarity…exposes the mechanism.

And once people see the mechanism…they stop accepting the story.

So What’s the One Most Important Thing You Can Do-Every Single Day?

Refuse to accept labels in place of evidence.

That’s it. That’s the hinge everything else swings on.

Every system that slides into authoritarian control does so the same way:

Not by banning disagreement first…but by replacing proof with designation. Once you accept that someone can be called a “terrorist,” “enemy,” or “threat” without a trial… the rest becomes paperwork.

So your daily responsibility isn’t to rage…panic…or even persuade everyone else.

It’s to pause…whenever a label is deployed…and ask one disciplined question:

Where is the evidence…and who has tested it?

Say it out loud. Say it online. Say it calmly. Say it repeatedly.

Because authoritarian power feeds on speed and emotion. It starves when confronted with process.

You don’t need to win arguments.
You don’t need to convert opponents.
You need to keep the standard alive.

Evidence before accusation.
Process before punishment.
Law before power.

That single insistence…applied every day…in ordinary conversations…is how free societies slow the slide…expose the mechanism…and remind institutions that their legitimacy depends on restraint.

It sounds small.
It isn’t

Final Thought

A government confident in its legitimacy does not need to pre-label its critics…its dead…or its dissidents.

A government that does… is telling you something about where it believes power truly comes from.

The question…now…is whether the country accepts that answer…
or insists on a different one.

#HoldFast

Back soon,

-Jack

Jack Hopkins