President Donald Trump’s recent executive order directing a review of Muslim Brotherhood chapters for potential terrorism designations is limited in scope, and leaves out scrutiny of Qatar and Turkey — a strategy that experts say reflects both legal realities and geopolitical constraints.

The order, which was signed on Nov. 24, directs Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent to identify which branches of the Muslim Brotherhood — with a focus on chapters in Jordan, Lebanon and Egypt — should be designated as Foreign Terrorist Organizations and which should be deemed Specially Designated Global Terrorists.

Rather than apply a terrorist designation to the entire Muslim Brotherhood as a whole, Trump’s executive order first looks at individual branches. This strategy is echoed in a Senate bill, sponsored by Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), which requires an assessment of every branch of the Muslim Brotherhood in an effort to designate the organization for its involvement. 

The House version of the legislation was modified in committee last week and now more closely resembles the Trump executive order.

Michael Jacobson, a senior fellow at The Washington Institute for Near East Policy, said the approach “makes sense,” adding that a “one-size-fits-all” designation would be unproductive. He also noted that it will allow the administration to more effectively pursue chapters of the organization.

“The bottom-up approach will allow the administration to proceed in a more strategic and calculated fashion,” said Jacobson. “Targeting individual chapters and entities could also open up additional avenues for investigation and action. Once individual branches are designated, the Treasury could then use its authorities to sanction those supporting these branches. I believe that this approach is also more likely to gain support from other governments.”

This same sentiment was echoed by Cruz, who called the “bottom-up” approach the “correct and sustainable strategy.”

“That strategy is built into both the president’s executive order, which was a bold and critical breakthrough in advancing American national security, and my bipartisan legislation,” Cruz told Jewish Insider. “It’s the consensus strategy, and it’s the right one.” 

David Adesnik, vice president of research at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, told JI that while a single designation done in “one fell swoop” might be appealing, it faces legal and factual challenges. 

“The administration was rightly concerned that a judge could overturn a designation of the entire organization if he or she assessed that it didn’t meet the legal thresholds. This would have serious consequences in several respects,” said Michael Jacobson, a senior fellow at The Washington Institute for Near East Policy. “If a judge ruled against a Muslim Brotherhood ban, it would be interpreted by some as a signal that the MB is not a terrorist organization, end of story — also a message the administration was likely eager to avoid.”

“This is not a single unified organization,” said Adesnik. “There’s no headquarters, no address, no person who is the head. It’s very hard to make a terror designation if you’re not exactly sure who you’re designating.”

Jacobson said the administration also looked to avoid a blanket designation out of concern that any legal challenges that followed could hurt efforts to reign in the Muslim Brotherhood. 

“The administration was rightly concerned that a judge could overturn a designation of the entire organization if he or she assessed that it didn’t meet the legal thresholds. This would have serious consequences in several respects,” said Jacobson. “If a judge ruled against a Muslim Brotherhood ban, it would be interpreted by some as a signal that the MB is not a terrorist organization, end of story — also a message the administration was likely eager to avoid.”

Some critics of the executive order, including far-right influencer Laura Loomer, who is a confidant of the president, have expressed frustration over the administration’s decision not to name Qatar and Turkey in the order.

“The Muslim Brotherhood designation signed by President Trump today doesn’t have any teeth,” Loomer posted on X on Nov. 24. “This designation is probably the weakest designation of the Muslim Brotherhood we could have ever received, as it doesn’t even apply to Qatar and Turkey.”

Both Qatar and Turkey have strengthened ties with the United States during Trump’s second term, however the two countries are also significant supporters of the Muslim Brotherhood and have been known to provide sanctuary for their members. 

“Claiming to get tough on the Muslim Brotherhood without a serious strategy to clamp down on the support provided by the movement’s most important state sponsors in Qatar and Turkey is not a serious policy,” said John Hannah, a senior fellow at the Jewish Institute for National Security of America. “Out of consideration for America’s longstanding partnerships with both countries and President Trump’s particular affinity for their leaders, one hopes that there is a plan to bring real pressure to bear on both Doha and Ankara in private to cease and desist their wide-ranging support for MB affiliates across the Middle East and globally.”

But while Qatar and Turkey’s ties to the Muslim Brotherhood are problematic, experts said they were not included because they do not currently have chapters of the organization in their countries, which the executive order focuses on.

“If we’re targeting chapters of the Brotherhood, there are no Brotherhood chapters in those countries,” said Adesnik. “So the real question is, how do you deal with what are effectively state sponsors of the Brotherhood? And does that state sponsorship cross the line into terrorism or sponsorship of terrorism?”

The Senate bill also does not address how Turkey and Qatar would be targeted as state sponsors of the organization. 

However, experts and legislators remain wary of the threat posed by the two nations and have expressed that plans to root out the Muslim Brotherhood should account for Turkey and Qatar.

“Claiming to get tough on the Muslim Brotherhood without a serious strategy to clamp down on the support provided by the movement’s most important state sponsors in Qatar and Turkey is not a serious policy,” said John Hannah, a senior fellow at the Jewish Institute for National Security of America. “Out of consideration for America’s longstanding partnerships with both countries and President Trump’s particular affinity for their leaders, one hopes that there is a plan to bring real pressure to bear on both Doha and Ankara in private to cease and desist their wide-ranging support for MB affiliates across the Middle East and globally.”

With the current executive order, the White House is seeking to first designate branches in countries that experts said are involved in violence from within the country. This will also likely include entities that finance other Foreign Terrorist Organizations, according to Jacobson. 

In Jordan, Lebanon and Egypt, threats connected to the Muslim Brotherhood have become national issues of concern. 

“The Islamic Group [Muslim Brotherhood chapter in Lebanon] clearly built up the ability to carry out attacks against Israel and cooperated very openly with Hezbollah,” said David Adesnik, vice president of research at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. “Authorities there really aren’t doing anything about it, partly because they lack power and have other issues to address. So it’s a pretty fair point.” 

In April 2025, Jordanian authorities arrested 16 individuals and thwarted a plot that was to involve rocket and drone attacks inside the country. The suspects were linked to the Muslim Brotherhood, which is the government’s largest opposition group. Following the arrests, the Jordanian government banned the group entirely. 

Adesnik said that while Jordan has initiated a “thorough crackdown” to address the problem, it is notable that there was “clearly a branch that had migrated toward planning for terrorism.” 

In Lebanon, he called the Muslim Brotherhood a “persistent issue.”

“The Islamic Group [Muslim Brotherhood chapter in Lebanon] pretty openly built up a capability to carry out attacks against Israel and cooperated very clearly and openly with Hezbollah,” said Adesnik. “Authorities there really aren’t doing anything about it, in part because they don’t have a lot of power and they have a lot of other problems to deal with. So it’s a pretty reasonable case.” 

Adesnik called the administration’s targeting of Egypt the “thorniest case from a definitional perspective.” He noted that while Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sissi’s regime in Cairo has spent more than a decade cracking down on the Brotherhood “aggressively,” concerns still remain over the presence of branches such as Harakat Sawa’d Misr, also known as Hasm, which was already designated by the U.S. as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist Entity in 2018. 

“The question is just what’s left of the Brotherhood there?” said Adesnik. “Is it doing enough to merit a designation?”

The firebombing of a hostage-release march in Boulder, Colo., this summer triggered a wave of calls from lawmakers — particularly Republicans — for action to designate the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization, Jewish Insider’s Emily Jacobs and Marc Rod report.

Legislation to that effect was introduced in both the Senate and House in July, taking a new approach to designating the group as compared to previous legislative efforts that had stalled over the course of the last decade.

The legislation would require the imposition of sanctions on the Muslim Brotherhood, making it illegal to provide support to the group, making its members and affiliates inadmissible to the United States and blocking transactions involving assets held by Muslim Brotherhood members in U.S. financial institutions.

There were also calls from lawmakers on both sides of the aisle for the Trump administration to investigate the group and take action to designate it through executive authorities. The secretary of state has the authority to designate a group as a Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO), and the White House could issue an executive order on the subject.

But so far, none of those efforts have come to fruition. The Senate bill currently sits at 11 co-sponsors, having recently picked up Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA) as its first Democratic supporter, while the House bill has 19 co-sponsors from both parties — below the levels of support previous iterations of the bill had amassed.

Fetterman’s co-sponsorship could help the bill receive consideration by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, as the panel often only considers legislation with bipartisan support. A source familiar with the matter tells JI that Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), the bill’s co-sponsor in the Senate and a member of the committee, is pushing for the panel to mark up the bill at their next business meeting. 

Neither bill has been called up yet for a vote in committee — a process further slowed by the ongoing government shutdown — and it is currently not included in either the Senate or House versions of the 2026 National Defense Authorization Act, a potential vehicle for legislation of this sort.

The White House declined to comment. A spokesperson for Cruz told JI: “Sen. Cruz is pushing for the bill to be advanced through the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and then to be passed by the full Senate. Sen. Fetterman is showing commitment and leadership to American national security interests by providing this measure with bipartisan backing here in the Senate, and it’s time to move it forward.”

Sen. James Lankford (R-OK), who is not currently a co-sponsor of the Senate bill but is supportive of efforts to counter the Muslim Brotherhood, told JI on Wednesday that the issue is not top of mind for many colleagues and it will take time to build interest and support for moves like designating the group.

Richard Goldberg, a senior advisor at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies and a former Trump administration official, told JI that, within the executive branch, FTO designations are a time-consuming process — requiring extensive legal consultations as well as significant behind-the-scenes work to understand potential implications, unintended consequences and diplomatic fallout, as well as assembling a list of visa exemptions needed for diplomats.

Based on public comments from Secretary of State Marco Rubio and the National Security Council’s Sebastian Gorka indicating support for a terrorism designation, Goldberg said that he believes that there is momentum in the administration, further fueled by the election of Zohran Mamdani as mayor of New York City, anti-Israel protests around the country and evidence of growing Islamist influence on the far right as well. He said that the fact that no designation has been announced should not necessarily be read as a sign that it is not actively being worked on in private.

Goldberg also said that any action on the designation from Congress would likely be timed to coordinate with potentially pending action by the Trump administration, given the high-profile nature of the issue and the administration’s expressed interest.

One potential obstacle to the efforts: Qatar and Turkey, with which the administration has been strengthening ties. Both have extensive links to the Muslim Brotherhood and could be resistant to such a designation. Goldberg, however, said he has not heard any discussion of those countries actively trying to stop a designation, and urged the Trump administration to push forward, describing the Muslim Brotherhood as both a threat to homeland security and President Donald Trump’s desire for Middle East peace.