Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas has reignited a battle that’s been simmering for a decade, dropping a fresh bill to slap the Muslim Brotherhood with a terrorist designation. This isn’t just a symbolic jab; it’s a calculated strike at a network tied to Hamas and other groups hostile to American security.

According to Breitbart News, Cruz reintroduced the Muslim Brotherhood Terrorist Designation Act of 2025 on Wednesday, aiming to sanction a global Islamist organization that he argues poses a direct threat to the United States. The bill links the Brotherhood to Hamas, spotlighting the October 7, 2023, attack that killed over 1,200 people, including at least 53 Americans.

Cruz isn’t mincing words, stating, “The Muslim Brotherhood is a terrorist organization, and it provides support to Muslim Brotherhood branches that are terrorist organizations.” But let’s unpack that: if the evidence of material support for groups like Hamas is as ironclad as the bill claims, why has it taken a decade to pin this label on them?

A Strategic Shift to Build the Case

This isn’t Cruz’s first rodeo with this issue; past attempts in 2015, 2017, 2020, and 2021 hit walls over concerns that not every Brotherhood affiliate was directly violent. His new “bottom-up” approach starts by targeting specific terror-linked branches before roping in the parent group for backing them.

The bill spells out that Hamas, per its own charter, is a wing of the Brotherhood in Palestine, and it’s hard to argue with documentation of the October 7 massacre as proof of intent. Cruz’s pivot is a smart sidestep around critics who’ve long shielded the organization under the guise of diplomatic nuance.

By focusing on concrete ties to terrorism, like financial resources and training, the legislation builds a foundation that’s tougher to dismiss as mere political posturing. If the Brotherhood is indeed funneling support to destabilize U.S. allies across the Middle East, as the bill alleges, then hesitation to act starts looking like cowardice.

Bipartisan Backing and Global Precedent

Sen. Tom Cotton, a co-sponsor from Arkansas, doubled down with a blunt assessment: “The Muslim Brotherhood preaches death to Israel, the United States, and other Western governments.” That’s not rhetoric to ignore when nations like Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and now Jordan have already banned the group as a terrorist threat.

In the House, Reps. Mario Díaz-Balart and Jared Moskowitz, a Republican and a Democrat from Florida, introduced a companion bill, showing rare cross-aisle agreement on national security. It’s a flicker of hope that pragmatic defense of American interests might trump partisan bickering.

Countries like Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates have long recognized the Brotherhood’s danger, outlawing its operations. If our allies see the writing on the wall, what’s stopping the U.S. from joining the coalition against a network founded in 1928 on radical goals of Sharia imposition?

Political Hurdles and Strategic Plays

Cruz admits the biggest roadblock is Senate Democrats, many of whom he doubts will back the measure despite his lobbying efforts. He’s pushing for a floor vote anyway, arguing it’ll force lawmakers to go on record about confronting terrorism ties.

Past objections centered on Brotherhood affiliates holding legislative seats in U.S.-friendly nations like Kuwait, raising diplomatic headaches. But Cruz’s refined focus on material support for terror groups undercuts that excuse, zeroing in on actions over mere association.

The bill’s penalties are no slap on the wrist: visa revocations, inadmissibility to the U.S., and mandatory annual reports to track Brotherhood branches globally. It’s a framework that demands accountability, though Cruz hints an executive order from President Trump might be a faster path if Congress drags its feet.

Why This Matters for American Security

The stakes here aren’t academic; the Brotherhood’s offshoots like Hamas have blood on their hands, including American lives lost on October 7. Cruz, as chair of a key Senate Foreign Relations subcommittee, is positioned to drive counterterrorism policy where it’s needed most.

This legislation, backed by senators like Rick Scott and Dave McCormick, isn’t just about labels; it’s about cutting off a network that’s undermined stability across the Middle East. If Democrats balk, they’ll have to explain why they’re soft on an organization tied to violence against our citizens and allies.

Ultimately, designating the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist group is a long-overdue step to protect national interests from a threat that has festered for nearly a century. While progressive voices may cry overreach, the evidence of terror support demands action over endless debate.