A sudden DOJ deletion has removed a National Institute of Justice (NIJ) study that concluded far-right and white supremacist violence “continues to outpace” other domestic extremism, triggering a whistle from researchers and a broader transparency alarm across the domestic terrorism research community. Archival checks indicate the DOJ page remained accessible until at least Sept. 12, 2025, before vanishing days later as a graduate researcher spotlighted the disappearance and journalists corroborated the takedown. [1][3]

Key Takeaways

– shows NIJ paper counted 227 far-right events causing 520+ deaths since 1990, outpacing left-wing violence by substantial margins nationwide. [2][5] – reveals far-right incidents were five times higher and deaths six times greater than left-wing attacks across the same period, per investigators. [5] – demonstrates the NIJ page remained live through Sept. 12, 2025, before the DOJ deletion was detected by researcher Daniel Malmer. [1][3] – indicates a 25% rise in domestic extremism incidents in 2025, heightening risks of removing public datasets and analytical studies. [4] – suggests OJP cited website review under Executive Orders in Sept. 2025, amplifying transparency concerns among journalists and researchers. [1][3]

What the NIJ study quantified before the DOJ deletion

The NIJ paper, now missing from visible DOJ pages, synthesized decades of incident data to show far-right extremists have been responsible for the clear majority of ideologically motivated homicides since 1990. Investigators connected to the work documented 227 far-right events leading to more than 520 deaths over that time horizon, a toll that dwarfed comparable tallies linked to left-wing offenders in the same period. The deleted analysis emphasized the sustained and disproportionate lethality of far-right and white supremacist violence in the United States. [2]

The magnitude of the disparity was not merely anecdotal. Researchers cited by coverage of the paper reported roughly five times more far-right incidents than left-wing incidents, and about six times more deaths attributed to far-right violence, reinforcing that the long-run risk profile has been skewed for decades. This ratio-based framing helps contextualize the death counts—showing that both frequency and lethality tilt toward far-right perpetrators in the historical record the NIJ study synthesized. [5]

Timeline of the DOJ deletion and the archival record

According to multiple reports and archival snapshots, the NIJ report remained available on DOJ websites at least through Sept. 12, 2025. Days later, the page could not be reached, and a doctoral student, Daniel Malmer, surfaced the issue publicly, prompting journalists to verify the change. That sequence—visible through mid-September, subsequently removed, discovery by an independent researcher—has been reconstructed via linked archives and newsroom checks. [1][3]

The Office of Justice Programs (OJP), which houses NIJ content, displayed a message stating pages were under review in light of policy guidance and Executive Orders. While that banner did not name the specific report, the timing aligns with the missing NIJ study and related pages reporters and researchers say they accessed earlier in September. Web archives—including the Wayback Machine—captured prior versions, ensuring the underlying text and statistics remain retrievable even as the live DOJ link now fails. [1][3][5]

A broader rollback of domestic extremism data

The disappearance fits into a wider pattern documented earlier this year: domestic extremism data tools and studies have repeatedly been scaled back, pulled offline, or defunded. Reporters catalogued multiple removals or cuts to public-facing databases and research products in 2025, underscoring a sustained retrenchment from transparency on politically violent extremism. Researchers warned that shuttering these sources slows analysis, hinders policy evaluation, and obscures trend monitoring during a period when risk indicators remain elevated. [4]

That broader context matters because 2025 is not a quiet year for threat signals. START-affiliated researchers noted a 25% rise in reported domestic extremism incidents in 2025, raising the stakes around what gets tracked, published, and preserved in the public domain. Cutting access to NIJ analyses precisely when incident metrics rise makes it harder to understand the contours of evolving risk, calibrate resource allocation, or test interventions against evidence. [4]

What officials say about the DOJ deletion

OJP has pointed to a website-wide review process, citing Executive Orders and policy guidance as the reason some pages are temporarily unavailable. The notice does not address the NIJ report’s findings, nor does it offer a timeline for restoration, revision, or formal replacement. As a result, outside observers can only infer that the review captured the NIJ study along with other materials now returning errors or placeholders where documents used to be. [1][3]

Separately, reporting has scrutinized possible political pressures around the removal. One national outlet described the disappearance as a quiet scrub by Attorney General Pam Bondi’s DOJ and linked the timing to heightened attention following the assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk—while emphasizing that the NIJ paper itself documented long-standing far-right predominance predating recent events by decades. These claims underscore the sensitivity around any shift in the government’s domestic extremism communications posture. [2]

Why the DOJ deletion matters for public safety

Public data is the scaffolding for risk assessment. When key federal research products like the NIJ study vanish from official sites, it weakens trust in the integrity of the information ecosystem and forces analysts to rely on less authoritative or harder-to-verify sources. In practical terms, federal, state, and local practitioners need stable baselines to allocate prevention grants, train investigators, and harden targets; sudden removals introduce uncertainty and delay. [4]

The quantitative signal in the NIJ paper was straightforward and policy-relevant: far-right offenders have been responsible for most ideologically motivated fatal attacks in the modern period, and their share of deaths far outstrips left-wing counterparts. While removing a page does not change those underlying facts, it complicates the ability of journalists, researchers, and officials to cite—and the public to find—an authoritative federal synthesis when discussing allocation of counter-extremism resources. [2][5]

How researchers can still access the report

The internet, as critics noted, is forever. Archival crawlers captured versions of the DOJ page and preserved the NIJ document, enabling scholars and reporters to continue citing the study’s figures, including the 227-event, 520-plus-death tally and the derived five-to-one and six-to-one comparative ratios. For now, that means the evidentiary backbone remains accessible, even if it takes an extra step to retrieve it via the Wayback Machine or newsroom mirrors. [5]

Beyond recovery, the episode has prompted some academics and nonprofits to maintain redundant repositories for key domestic extremism studies. Redundancy reduces single points of failure when official portals change or are placed under review. In effect, decentralization of the archive becomes a resilience strategy for the research community, especially during periods of policy volatility. [5]

Methodology and limitations acknowledged by investigators

While summary coverage highlights headline ratios and totals, investigators emphasized that definitions and inclusion criteria—what counts as an ideologically motivated homicide, which groups are categorized as far-right or left-wing, and the time bounds (since 1990)—shape the totals. Still, across definitions commonly used in federal and academic literature, the direction of the disparity—more incidents and more deaths on the far-right side—remained consistent within the NIJ synthesis. [2][5]

It is also important not to conflate overall crime or non-ideological mass violence with domestic extremist offenses. The NIJ analysis focused on ideologically motivated attacks and fatal outcomes, a domain where trends permit clearer cross-year comparisons and policy testing. In that narrower lens, the historical preponderance of far-right responsibility is robust, and the 2025 removal of a federal summary of those facts has immediate implications for public discourse and oversight. [2][5]

The next steps: transparency, restoration, and oversight

Transparency advocates argue that the simplest corrective is to restore the NIJ page with a clear review note, rather than remove it entirely. If edits are required under Executive Orders, agencies can annotate the revision history, publish a summary of changes, and provide a restoration timeline so experts know when and how to rely on the document again. This approach balances compliance with continuity—preserving the public’s access to vital statistics while policies are updated. [1][3]

In parallel, Congress and watchdogs may ask for documentation of the scope of the website review and a list of affected pages, so the public can assess the cumulative impact on domestic extremism research. Given a documented 25% rise in cases this year and repeated removals earlier in 2025, central repositories are becoming single points of policy risk; making the scope and rationale public is a necessary first step to rebuild trust. [4]

Sources:

[1] 404 Media – DOJ Deletes Study Showing Domestic Terrorists Are Most Often Right Wing: www.404media.co/doj-deletes-study-showing-domestic-terrorists-are-most-often-right-wing/” target=”_blank” rel=”nofollow noopener noreferrer”>https://www.404media.co/doj-deletes-study-showing-domestic-terrorists-are-most-often-right-wing/

[2] The Daily Beast – Bondi’s DOJ Censors Study Showing Who Commits Political Violence: www.thedailybeast.com/doj-quietly-scrubs-study-on-far-right-attacks-after-kirk-shooting/” target=”_blank” rel=”nofollow noopener noreferrer”>https://www.thedailybeast.com/doj-quietly-scrubs-study-on-far-right-attacks-after-kirk-shooting/ [3] Nieman Journalism Lab – DOJ deletes study showing domestic terrorists are most often right wing: www.niemanlab.org/reading/doj-deletes-study-showing-domestic-terrorists-are-most-often-right-wing/” target=”_blank” rel=”nofollow noopener noreferrer”>https://www.niemanlab.org/reading/doj-deletes-study-showing-domestic-terrorists-are-most-often-right-wing/

[4] The Washington Post – Trump administration cuts national database tracking domestic terrorism: www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2025/03/25/domestic-extremism-database-trump-cuts/” target=”_blank” rel=”nofollow noopener noreferrer”>https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2025/03/25/domestic-extremism-database-trump-cuts/ [5] Daily Kos – In its haste to cover up the truth, DOJ forgets the internet is forever: www.dailykos.com/stories/2025/9/16/2343876/-In-its-haste-to-cover-up-the-truth-DOJ-forgets-the-internet-is-forever” target=”_blank” rel=”nofollow noopener noreferrer”>https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2025/9/16/2343876/-In-its-haste-to-cover-up-the-truth-DOJ-forgets-the-internet-is-forever

Image generated by DALL-E 3