FBI, ADL, and Mossad

FBI Director Kash Patel Severs Ties with ADL, Accusing Organization of “Spying on Americans”

Washington, D.C. – In a significant move in October 2025, FBI Director Kash Patel announced the termination of the bureau’s long-standing relationship with the Anti-Defamation League (ADL).¹ Patel accused the civil rights organization of “spying on Americans,” a claim that has ignited a firestorm of controversy.²

The decision to cut ties followed a period of increasing tension between the new FBI leadership and the ADL.³ In a public statement, Director Patel alleged that the ADL had overstepped its role as a civil rights watchdog and engaged in activities that amounted to domestic surveillance.⁴ “The FBI will not be party to organizations that exploit their position to monitor and collect information on American citizens under the guise of combating hate,” Patel stated.

The ADL has vehemently denied the allegations, calling them “baseless and defamatory.” In a press release, the organization defended its work in tracking extremist groups and providing intelligence to law enforcement agencies, stating that its efforts have always been in accordance with the law and aimed at protecting vulnerable communities.

The move by Director Patel has drawn both praise and condemnation. Supporters of the decision argue that it is a necessary step to rein in what they see as the overreach of non-governmental organizations in law enforcement matters. Critics, however, have expressed deep concern that severing ties with the ADL will hinder the FBI’s ability to combat domestic extremism and hate crimes, particularly at a time when such threats are a major concern.⁵

Historical context for this decision includes the ADL’s long history of working with federal and local law enforcement agencies to provide training and data on extremist movements.⁶ This partnership, which has spanned decades, has now come to an abrupt end, signaling a potential shift in the FBI’s approach to domestic intelligence gathering and its relationships with outside organizations.⁷ The full ramifications of this decision on national security and civil liberties are yet to be seen.