POLISCOPE
Back to feed

The civic record

Read. Follow. Verify.
High Impact

Hearing on State and Local Responses to Domestic Terrorism

Original title: STATE AND LOCAL RESPONSES TO DOMESTIC TERRORISM: THE ATTACK ON THE U.S. CAPITOL AND BEYOND

Record date · January 1, 2021

Track this bill to get notified when it advances a stage. One tap to stop, anytime.

What This Bill Does

This document is a transcript of a March 24, 2021, House Subcommittee hearing regarding how state and local governments are addressing the rise of and violent extremism. The hearing featured testimony from state attorneys general and a district attorney to discuss the challenges of managing these threats at the local level.

Why it matters

This hearing establishes the federal legislative focus on coordinating domestic counterterrorism efforts between state, local, and federal agencies following the January 6th Capitol attack.

Who It Affects

Groups the bill's text affects, as described in the record. Being affected is not a position for or against it.

Directly affected

State and Local Law Enforcement

These agencies are responsible for implementing counterterrorism strategies and managing local responses to violent extremism.

Directly affected

Department of Homeland Security

The federal agency tasked with coordinating national security and counterterrorism policy.

Key Facts

  • The hearing was held on March 24, 2021, by the Subcommittee on Intelligence and Counterterrorism.
  • The primary focus was examining state and local responses to domestic terrorism and violent extremism.
  • Witnesses included the Attorneys General of Michigan and Nevada, and the District Attorney of Milwaukee County, Wisconsin.
  • The hearing addressed the normalization of political violence and mass violence in society.
Show all 5 facts
  • The subcommittee received written statements and letters for the record from various state-level legal officials, including the Attorney General of Oregon and the District Attorney of New York County.

Frequently Asked Questions

What was the purpose of this hearing?
The hearing was convened to discuss how state and local governments are responding to the threat of and violent extremism.
Who testified at the hearing?
The witnesses were Dana Nessel (Attorney General of Michigan), Aaron D. Ford (Attorney General of Nevada), and John T. Chisholm (District Attorney of Milwaukee County, Wisconsin).

What else do you want to know?

News Coverage

No news coverage found yet. Articles are indexed twice daily.

Full breakdown

Who this bill affects and the strongest case for and against it, written only from the bill’s own text.

Discoveries

1 pattern noticed across the record

Patterns POLISCOPE noticed across the record. These are observations to investigate, not conclusions.

policy shift80% confidence

Focus on Local-Federal Coordination

The hearing highlights a strategic shift toward integrating state and local legal officials into the federal counterterrorism framework.

Connected Entities

Elissa Slotkin, Committee on Homeland Security, Dana Nessel and 2 more
PersonElissa Slotkin“Chairwoman of the Subcommittee on Intelligence and Counterterrorism”Map →
OrganizationCommittee on Homeland Security“House committee overseeing the subcommittee”Map →
PersonDana Nessel“Attorney General of Michigan and hearing witness”Map →
PersonAaron D. Ford“Attorney General of Nevada and hearing witness”Map →
PersonJohn T. Chisholm“District Attorney of Milwaukee County, Wisconsin and hearing witness”Map →

Sources

Open source document

www.govinfo.gov

Analysis Score

0–100
  • Significance75
    How much this matters to a regular citizen
  • Controversy60
    Intensity of disagreement among stakeholders
  • Entertainment20
    Compellingness for a non-policy-wonk reader
  • Buzz30
    Current news / social attention level

Publisher tools

Share or embed this record

POLISCOPE publisher tools

Share or embed this record