While America is often memed as “the free country,” that doesn’t mean everyone is free to do or even say whatever they want, even online. The National Security Presidential Memorandum 7 (NSPM-7) was established by Trump last year in D.C., with its main focus on “Countering Domestic Terrorism and Organized Political Violence.” According to TPM, the government is further pushing its crackdown on anyone daring to make an alleged threat online, no matter how random the person might be.
As a refresher, the NSPM-7 was created back in September of 2025 shortly after the death of Charlie Kirk and is aimed at the prevention of “political violence, terrorism, or conspiracy against rights.” Recently, Joint Task Force Vanguard has been investigating multiple cases, a DOJ-led effort to coordinate multiple agencies in implementing the NSPM-7. The goal is to identify those displaying “anti-Americanism, anti-capitalism, and anti-Christianity,” and other “extremism,” followed by prosecution of those deemed dangerous.
FBI Co-Deputy Director Christopher Raia claims that NSPM-7 has actually “been the thing I’ve worked on the most” on the Media Rep Global Strategies YouTube channel. Most of the focus allegedly targets online threats, with several cases as prime examples of what happens to those who pose a notable threat.
Related: West Point Drops Trump-Era Policy Requiring Professors to Get Approval Before Publishing or Speaking
One such case would be Donald Franklin Swope from Maryland, who is facing charges for threatening to “behead” Trump and cause the President injury in multiple Facebook posts. According to a press release by the Attorney’s Office in Maryland, Swope faces a ” maximum of five years in prison for each count of threatening communications and 10 years for influencing, impeding, or retaliating against a federal official.”
While being charged as a criminal is the most severe possible outcome for an online threat, those who pose less serious risk still could be intimidated by the federal task forces. Raia says this could involve authorities knocking on someone’s door and telling them to “knock it off” as a way to disrupt their online remarks.
People Aren’t Protected by the First Amendment When It Comes to ‘Serious Threats’
While plenty of critics have claimed this to be a violation of the First Amendment, people can say bad things about others. However, they are not allowed to make “true threats,” which the Supreme Court explains is a step before one “commits acts of unlawful violence.” In other words, freedom of speech, even “ugly” speech, is protected, but freedom of serious threats is not.
Threaten a government official with violence online, and federal officers might pay the poster a visit, with a warning or with handcuffs.
