FY2022 NDAA: Extremism in the Military
link to page 1 
INSIGHTi
FY2022 NDAA: Extremism in the Military
Updated January 5, 2022
Background
Government agencies and other experts have warned of an increasing threat of domestic violent
extremism in the United States, efforts by supremacist and anti-government extremist groups to recruit
those with military experience, and evidence of military-affiliated personnel membership and
participation in these groups’ activities. Extremist and supremacist activity among military-affiliated
personnel has been the subject of several congressional hearings and legislative proposals over the past
few years. This issue received further attention following revelations that several alleged perpetrators of
crimes at the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021, had military backgrounds.
In response, the Department of Defense (DOD) increased efforts to address these issues. In February
2021, Defense Secretary Lloyd J. Austin III issued an order for a 60-day DOD-wide stand down to
address and discuss issues related to extremism followed on April 9 by the establishment of a working
group to counter extremism. DOD released the Countering Extremist Activity Working Group (CEAWG)
report in December 2021, along with an updated DOD instruction on Handling Protest, Extremist, and
Criminal Gang Activities Among Members of the Armed Forces that defines both “extremist activities”
and “active participation.” Other federal government initiatives are detailed in the National Security
Council’s June 2021 National Strategy for Combatting Domestic Terrorism.
Several provisions in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022 (FY2022 NDAA),
enacted on December 27, 2021, seek to enhance oversight, awareness, and disciplinary authorities related
to servicemember support for or participation in extremist activities (see Table 1).
Table 1. FY2022 NDAA Legislative Proposals
Senate Armed Services
House-passed H.R. 4350
Enacted Legislation
Committee-passed S. 2792
Section 525 would add a punitive
Section 527 would require a DOD
Section 549M adopts the Senate
article to the Uniform Code of Military
report on whether to establish a
provision.
Justice (UCMJ) on violent extremism.
separate punitive article in the UCMJ
on violent extremism.
Congressional Research Service
https://crsreports.congress.gov
IN11779
CRS INSIGHT
Prepared for Members and
Committees of Congress
Congressional Research Service
2
Senate Armed Services
House-passed H.R. 4350
Enacted Legislation
Committee-passed S. 2792
Section 529A would:
No similar provision.
Not adopted.
Prohibit servicemembers from
participation in extremist activities
and organizations,
Establish a DOD oversight office
with responsibility for countering
extremism policies,
Require training on extremist
insider threats, media literacy, and
whistleblower protections,
Require data col ection and
reporting on extremist activities,
Provide authority to utilize online
extremist content as cause for
servicemember separation.
Section 518 would prohibit DOD from
No similar provisions.
Not adopted; however, the Joint
disciplining a servicemember for social
Explanatory Statement to accompany
media posts or online activity based on
the bil directs the Secretary of
the output of an automated
Defense to provide a briefing to the
algorithmic, mathematical, or other
Armed Services Committees on any
analytic tool, unless an imminent threat
analytical tool DOD uses, or plans to
of physical violence exists.
use, to monitor the social media
Section 519 would prohibit DOD from
activities of servicemembers.
taking disciplinary action against a
servicemember for online speech
regarding a political matter.
Source: CRS analysis of legislation.
Discussion
DOD policy, updated on December 20, 2021, defines “extremist activities” and prohibits servicemembers
from actively participating in these activities. Those in violation of such orders may be subject to
administrative action or prosecution under the military justice system.
Section 525 of the House-passed bill would have created a separate punitive article in the Uniform Code
of Military Justice (UCMJ) criminalizing “violent extremism.” The enacted legislation adopts a provision
from the Senate bill requiring DOD to make recommendations to Congress on whether to add such a
punitive article. “Violent extremism” is not defined in military law or policy. Other violent and
destructive actions (e.g., assault, rioting, threats) are punishable under the UCMJ. The proposed UCMJ
article would have tied these actions to intent to “intimidate or coerce any person or class of people,” or
“influence, affect, or retaliate against the policy or conduct of the Government of the United States or any
State.”
Section 529A of the House-passed bill, which was not enacted, would have added a new chapter to Title
10, United States Code on “Countering Extremism.” The Senate bill did not include a similar proposal.
Among other changes, the House provision would have, 1) established a new Office of Countering
Extremism within the Office of the Secretary of Defense, for oversight and programming, to counter
extremism within the military and 2) required DOD to implement a counter extremism training program
for recruiters, new recruits, officers, and enlisted members prior to promotion to certain grades and for
Congressional Research Service
3
those transitioning out of the military. DOD’s December 2021 CEAWG report recommended the
development of a “comprehensive training and education plan that provides regular training on prohibited
extremist activity to [DOD] personnel, including those advancing to leadership positions.”
Other provisions in Section 529A of the House bill would have authorized DOD to utilize online content
expressing support for extremist activity that is “knowingly shared, disseminated, or otherwise made
available” as a cause for involuntary separation from the Armed Forces. While Sections 518 and 519 of
the House bill did not mention extremism, these provisions would have sought to protect servicemembers
from disciplinary actions related to online activity. A 2020 congressionally mandated report on screening
enlistees for extremist or gang-related activity noted DOD was, “exploring the use of social media
information in the conduct of background checks,” and cautioned against “complete reliance on data-
driven solutions” due to potential vulnerabilities. The enacted FY2022 NDAA did not adopt these
provisions. However, the Joint Explanatory Statement to accompany the bill directs the Secretary of
Defense to provide a briefing within 180 days to the Armed Services Committees on any analytical tool
DOD uses, or plans to use, to monitor the social media activities of servicemembers.
For more, see CRS Insight IN10299, Sifting Domestic Terrorism from Hate Crime and Homegrown
Violent Extremism, CRS Report R45713, Terrorism, Violent Extremism, and the Internet: Free Speech
Considerations, and CRS Legal Sidebar LSB10570, Unrest at the Capitol: Potential Violations of the
Uniform Code of Military Justice
Author Information
Kristy N. Kamarck
Specialist in Military Manpower
Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff
to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of
Congress. Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of
information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role.
CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United
States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However,
as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the
permission of the copyright holder if you wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.
IN11779 · VERSION 5 · UPDATED
INSIGHTi
FY2022 NDAA: Extremism in the Military
Updated January 5, 2022
Background
Government agencies and other experts have warned of an increasing threat of domestic violent
extremism in the United States, efforts by supremacist and anti-government extremist groups to recruit
those with military experience, and evidence of military-affiliated personnel membership and
participation in these groups’ activities. Extremist and supremacist activity among military-affiliated
personnel has been the subject of several congressional hearings and legislative proposals over the past
few years. This issue received further attention following revelations that several alleged perpetrators of
crimes at the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021, had military backgrounds.
In response, the Department of Defense (DOD) increased efforts to address these issues. In February
2021, Defense Secretary Lloyd J. Austin III issued an order for a 60-day DOD-wide stand down to
address and discuss issues related to extremism followed on April 9 by the establishment of a working
group to counter extremism. DOD released the Countering Extremist Activity Working Group (CEAWG)
report in December 2021, along with an updated DOD instruction on Handling Protest, Extremist, and
Criminal Gang Activities Among Members of the Armed Forces that defines both “extremist activities”
and “active participation.” Other federal government initiatives are detailed in the National Security
Council’s June 2021 National Strategy for Combatting Domestic Terrorism.
Several provisions in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022 (FY2022 NDAA),
enacted on December 27, 2021, seek to enhance oversight, awareness, and disciplinary authorities related
to servicemember support for or participation in extremist activities (see Table 1).
Table 1. FY2022 NDAA Legislative Proposals
Senate Armed Services
House-passed H.R. 4350
Enacted Legislation
Committee-passed S. 2792
Section 525 would add a punitive
Section 527 would require a DOD
Section 549M adopts the Senate
article to the Uniform Code of Military
report on whether to establish a
provision.
Justice (UCMJ) on violent extremism.
separate punitive article in the UCMJ
on violent extremism.
Congressional Research Service
https://crsreports.congress.gov
IN11779
CRS INSIGHT
Prepared for Members and
Committees of Congress
Congressional Research Service
2
Senate Armed Services
House-passed H.R. 4350
Enacted Legislation
Committee-passed S. 2792
Section 529A would:
No similar provision.
Not adopted.
Prohibit servicemembers from
participation in extremist activities
and organizations,
Establish a DOD oversight office
with responsibility for countering
extremism policies,
Require training on extremist
insider threats, media literacy, and
whistleblower protections,
Require data col ection and
reporting on extremist activities,
Provide authority to utilize online
extremist content as cause for
servicemember separation.
Section 518 would prohibit DOD from
No similar provisions.
Not adopted; however, the Joint
disciplining a servicemember for social
Explanatory Statement to accompany
media posts or online activity based on
the bil directs the Secretary of
the output of an automated
Defense to provide a briefing to the
algorithmic, mathematical, or other
Armed Services Committees on any
analytic tool, unless an imminent threat
analytical tool DOD uses, or plans to
of physical violence exists.
use, to monitor the social media
Section 519 would prohibit DOD from
activities of servicemembers.
taking disciplinary action against a
servicemember for online speech
regarding a political matter.
Source: CRS analysis of legislation.
Discussion
DOD policy, updated on December 20, 2021, defines “extremist activities” and prohibits servicemembers
from actively participating in these activities. Those in violation of such orders may be subject to
administrative action or prosecution under the military justice system.
Section 525 of the House-passed bill would have created a separate punitive article in the Uniform Code
of Military Justice (UCMJ) criminalizing “violent extremism.” The enacted legislation adopts a provision
from the Senate bill requiring DOD to make recommendations to Congress on whether to add such a
punitive article. “Violent extremism” is not defined in military law or policy. Other violent and
destructive actions (e.g., assault, rioting, threats) are punishable under the UCMJ. The proposed UCMJ
article would have tied these actions to intent to “intimidate or coerce any person or class of people,” or
“influence, affect, or retaliate against the policy or conduct of the Government of the United States or any
State.”
Section 529A of the House-passed bill, which was not enacted, would have added a new chapter to Title
10, United States Code on “Countering Extremism.” The Senate bill did not include a similar proposal.
Among other changes, the House provision would have, 1) established a new Office of Countering
Extremism within the Office of the Secretary of Defense, for oversight and programming, to counter
extremism within the military and 2) required DOD to implement a counter extremism training program
for recruiters, new recruits, officers, and enlisted members prior to promotion to certain grades and for
Congressional Research Service
3
those transitioning out of the military. DOD’s December 2021 CEAWG report recommended the
development of a “comprehensive training and education plan that provides regular training on prohibited
extremist activity to [DOD] personnel, including those advancing to leadership positions.”
Other provisions in Section 529A of the House bill would have authorized DOD to utilize online content
expressing support for extremist activity that is “knowingly shared, disseminated, or otherwise made
available” as a cause for involuntary separation from the Armed Forces. While Sections 518 and 519 of
the House bill did not mention extremism, these provisions would have sought to protect servicemembers
from disciplinary actions related to online activity. A 2020 congressionally mandated report on screening
enlistees for extremist or gang-related activity noted DOD was, “exploring the use of social media
information in the conduct of background checks,” and cautioned against “complete reliance on data-
driven solutions” due to potential vulnerabilities. The enacted FY2022 NDAA did not adopt these
provisions. However, the Joint Explanatory Statement to accompany the bill directs the Secretary of
Defense to provide a briefing within 180 days to the Armed Services Committees on any analytical tool
DOD uses, or plans to use, to monitor the social media activities of servicemembers.
For more, see CRS Insight IN10299, Sifting Domestic Terrorism from Hate Crime and Homegrown
Violent Extremism, CRS Report R45713, Terrorism, Violent Extremism, and the Internet: Free Speech
Considerations, and CRS Legal Sidebar LSB10570, Unrest at the Capitol: Potential Violations of the
Uniform Code of Military Justice
Author Information
Kristy N. Kamarck
Specialist in Military Manpower
Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff
to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of
Congress. Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of
information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role.
CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United
States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However,
as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the
permission of the copyright holder if you wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.
IN11779 · VERSION 5 · UPDATED