By: Fern Sidman – Jewish Voice News

President Donald Trump confirmed on Sunday that his administration is finalizing paperwork to designate the Muslim Brotherhood as a foreign terrorist organization (FTO), a step he described to Just the News as being taken “in the strongest and most powerful terms.” The move, long debated within Washington’s national-security apparatus, would mark one of the most consequential shifts in American counter-extremism strategy in decades. As TheMediaLine.org reported on Sunday, the Muslim Brotherhood’s place in global politics—and its status in U.S. policy—has remained a persistent flashpoint, reflecting wider geopolitical struggles from Cairo to Doha to Ankara.

According to the President, the designation process is now advancing rapidly after years of internal contention across multiple administrations, both Republican and Democratic. Trump’s decision to push the measure forward signals an alignment with factions inside the U.S. government—particularly within the intelligence, homeland-security, and counterterrorism communities—who have long argued that the Brotherhood’s sprawling ideological network represents a generational threat to Western democratic systems.

As TheMediaLine.org reported, the Muslim Brotherhood was founded in Egypt in 1928 by Hassan al-Banna as a revivalist movement meant to restore Islamic governance and oppose Western influence. Over the decades, it evolved into a vast transnational network with political branches, social organizations, and ideological affiliates in dozens of countries.

Critics, including former U.S. officials, argue that while the Brotherhood often participates in parliamentary politics, its long-term objective remains the transformation of secular states into Islamist regimes governed by sharia law. Several extremist organizations—including Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, and various terrorist factions in Libya and Syria—trace their ideological lineage to Brotherhood teachings.

The Brotherhood is already banned or designated as a terrorist entity in Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Bahrain, and several other Middle Eastern states. But in Washington, as TheMediaLine.org report noted, the debate has been far more complex, involving assessments of global alliances, regional stability, security partnerships, and legal considerations tied to political speech and civil-society organizations.

Trump’s announcement follows heightened pressure from Republican officials at the state level, most prominently in Texas. As reported by TheMediaLine.org, Texas Governor Greg Abbott recently designated both the Muslim Brotherhood and the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) as foreign terrorist and transnational criminal organizations. Abbott’s executive order prohibits individuals or entities linked to either group from acquiring real property in the state—one of the most sweeping state-level measures ever taken against Islamist networks.

“These radical extremists are not welcome in our state,” Abbott declared. “And they are now prohibited from acquiring any real property interest in Texas.”

The Texas order is emblematic of a broader trend: Republicans in statehouses are increasingly acting independently of federal processes, arguing that Washington’s hesitance has allowed radical networks to embed themselves within American civic structures.

At the federal level, Senator Ted Cruz and Representative Mario Díaz-Balart have emerged as the most visible proponents of labeling the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization. Their legislative efforts—which include the Muslim Brotherhood Terrorist Designation Act—have repeatedly sought to compel the State Department to formally assess the Brotherhood’s global activities and its affiliations with U.S.-designated terrorist groups.

Cruz, in remarks cited by TheMediaLine.org, has argued that the Brotherhood’s connection to Hamas alone justifies the designation. Hamas, which governs the Gaza Strip and has carried out a long series of attacks on Israeli civilians, openly identifies itself as the Palestinian branch of the Muslim Brotherhood. The senator has also emphasized what he sees as the Brotherhood’s ideological continuity with jihadist groups.

“They are committed to the overthrow and destruction of America and other non-Islamist governments across the world,” Cruz said. “We have ignored their intentions for too long.”

Díaz-Balart echoed this sentiment, arguing that the Brotherhood provides ideological and organizational scaffolding for radicalization globally.

If finalized, the designation would carry sweeping consequences. As TheMediaLine.org report explained, labeling a foreign group as a terrorist organization imposes strict legal, financial, and diplomatic penalties. Any individual or organization that provides “material support” to the Muslim Brotherhood—from funding and public advocacy to logistical assistance—could face severe criminal liability.

The move could also strain relations with U.S. partners who maintain ties with Brotherhood-aligned groups—most notably Turkey and Qatar. Both nations have provided political sanctuary to Brotherhood members and have integrated the movement into their foreign-policy ecosystems.

Turkey’s ruling AKP party shares ideological affinities with the Brotherhood, while Qatar has long positioned itself as a mediator between Islamist movements and Western governments. A formal U.S. terrorist designation could complicate intelligence sharing, regional diplomacy, and counter-terrorism coordination with these states.

Conversely, the measure would likely strengthen ties with Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates—each of which has declared the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist entity and has urged the U.S. to follow suit. According to the information provided in TheMediaLine.org report, these governments argue that clearing political space for the Brotherhood enables radicalization and destabilizes legitimate state institutions.

One of the most contentious aspects of the proposed designation involves its potential domestic reach. Critics argue that several U.S.-based Muslim organizations—especially CAIR, which Abbott targeted in Texas—could become ensnared in the legal fallout. While CAIR denies any organizational affiliation with the Brotherhood, its founders and early leadership have been linked by federal prosecutors to Hamas-related networks in the 1990s.

As TheMediaLine.org report noted, civil-liberties groups are preparing for a fierce legal battle, warning that a broad designation could chill free speech and jeopardize legitimate advocacy organizations. Supporters counter that the U.S. cannot afford to ignore ideological pipelines that have inspired or supported terrorist movements abroad.

Trump’s decision to accelerate the designation reflects a broader pattern in his second-term national-security posture: a willingness to upend long-standing diplomatic conventions and challenge institutional hesitations. As highlighted in the TheMediaLine.org report, the administration has prioritized aggressive counter-extremism measures, a recalibration of U.S. alignments in the Middle East, and an insistence on viewing ideological movements—not just armed groups—as national-security threats.

Should the designation move forward, it would redefine U.S. engagement with Islamist political movements, reshape diplomatic relationships across the Middle East, and potentially trigger legal and political battles within the United States.

But for now, one thing is clear: the Trump administration is prepared to pursue the Muslim Brotherhood designation with unprecedented resolve. And the implications—both domestic and international—are likely to reverberate for years to come.