Yesterday, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced in a radio interview with Sid Rosenberg that the US government is actively considering designating the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization. He emphasized that “everything is in motion” and noted that different branches of the organization would have to be classified separately. Such designations, he explained, require extensive legal documentation to withstand potential court challenges.
Rubio stressed that any decision must be made with great caution, as federal courts could issue nationwide injunctions. “Your work has to stand up in court like a math problem,” he remarked.
His comments come in the context of pending legislation — the Muslim Brotherhood Terrorist Designation Act of 2025, introduced by Senator Ted Cruz and other Republicans. The bill aims to specifically name and sanction violent factions of the Muslim Brotherhood and establish a legal framework for broader classification.
Rubio also underscored the close ties between the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas, which is regarded as the Brotherhood’s official Palestinian branch. Such links have already led to parts of the organization being designated as terrorist in the past.
Legally, the decision falls under the jurisdiction of the US State Department, as formally regulated in the Immigration and Nationality Act. Rubio made it clear that the initiative could not proceed in a blanket fashion: each branch would need to be examined individually to survive judicial scrutiny.
Legal experts warn of two main challenges. First, the Muslim Brotherhood is a loose network encompassing political, social, and at times violent elements. A blanket designation would be vulnerable to legal attack. Second, if the designation were to affect US-based organizations, lawsuits could follow, citing violations of the First Amendment’s protections for freedom of speech and association. Previous attempts to target organizations suspected of ties to Hamas have already led to years of litigation.
Rubio’s remarks come at a time when Republicans in Congress are pushing the Muslim Brotherhood Terrorist Designation Act of 2025. Senator Cruz, its chief sponsor, wants to provide a clear statutory basis for action. Supporters in Congress emphasize the ideological affinity between the Brotherhood and Hamas, which is already listed as a terrorist group, and point to longstanding allegations that the Brotherhood exerts influence in Western societies through social, religious, and political channels.
Critics, however, warn of a precedent that could place even moderate Islamic movements or civil society groups under blanket suspicion. US Muslim organizations such as the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC) and the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) condemned Rubio’s remarks. CAIR, which has long rejected allegations of ties to the Muslim Brotherhood as unfounded, vowed to take legal action if directly targeted.
Rubio’s interview hints at a phased approach: first, designating clearly identifiable violent structures within the Brotherhood abroad; then, reviewing other affiliates and networks; and finally, confronting the political and legal debate over potential domestic implications. This would likely involve close cooperation between the State Department, intelligence agencies, and the Department of Justice to ensure an evidence-based case.
Rubio’s announcement sends a strong signal to advocates of a tougher stance against the Muslim Brotherhood — but also acknowledges the legal and political complexity involved. A terrorist designation could have far-reaching consequences for US relations in the Arab world, for NGOs, and for domestic debates over security and civil liberties.
Whether the “math problem” Rubio refers to ultimately adds up will depend not only on political will but, above all, on legal precision.
