On Dec. 4, 2024, Brian Thompson, then-CEO of UnitedHealthcare, was shot and killed on a New York City sidewalk. After a five-day manhunt, Pennsylvania authorities identified and arrested Luigi Mangione as the alleged culprit. As the killing drew extensive media coverage and attention, federal and state prosecutors swiftly announced their intent to charge the 26-year-old. New York moved first. On Dec. 17, the public learned that the Manhattan district attorney was pursuing charges of murder—as an act of terrorism.
Terrorism is an elusive term. Its murkiness has been cited as a source—if not the source—of its susceptibility to abuse. Indeed, in bringing the charges, the district attorney appears to have seized upon the textual vacuousness of New York’s criminal terrorism provisions. These provisions impose the label of “terrorism” on certain specified offenses, including a Class A felony, committed “with intent to intimidate or coerce a civilian population, influence the policy of a unit of government by intimidation or coercion, or affect the conduct of a unit of government by murder, assassination or kidnapping.” The office has used this statutory language to describe the incident as “frightening” and “intended to cause shock and attention and intimidation,” teeing up an argument that Thompson’s killing was meant to “intimidate or coerce” a very specific “civilian population”: the health insurance industry.
The district attorney’s decision, however, pushes the limits of whatever lubrication “terrorism” and New York’s penal code can provide. Indeed, the announcement of the charge provoked public outrage and confusion. Considering terrorism’s slipperiness, the American public’s response reflects distrust in its application…