Online reactions to Donald Trump’s May 2024 conviction

Social media was flooded with threats of violence and revenge following Trump’s conviction on 31 May. These online threats signal an ongoing political polarisation in US society, contributing to decreasing trust in institutions, as well as the normalisation of violent language. Combined, these dynamics increase the potential for physical violence and unrest in the coming months.

Incendiary comments spread across social platforms after New York’s state court found former US President Donald Trump guilty on 34 felony counts for falsifying business records. The reaction was similar to that observed during the FBI’s search of Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort in August 2022, and was largely expected. Trump’s more radical supporters, including some far-right and extremist groups, are well known for violent and inflammatory online rhetoric, and judges, juries and journalists involved in Trump’s cases routinely face online – and occasional physical – threats designed to defame and intimidate. However, ahead of a closely contested election in November, and with the lingering memory of the January 2021 Capitol Hill riots, these reactions reflect a growing disillusionment with the integrity of state institutions and have prompted renewed concerns over the potential for violence and unrest.

A note on our approach

Alongside open-source research, we utilised an AI-enabled data analytics platform (and a series of keywords and Boolean strings) to identify posts responding to Trump’s verdict on various social media platforms, community discussion forums, and the dark/deep web. We broadly looked to identify calls for opposition, generalised violence and specific threats against institutions and individuals, encouragement of staging a coup or insurrection, and other acts of political violence following the verdict.

Trump’s supporters react

Many Trump supporters have decried the proceedings as a politically motivated sham. With the more extreme elements calling for violent retribution and rioting, causing concern over the potential for renewed violent rallies like that of January 2021. Online platforms popular with conservative groups like Gateway Pundit, Truth Social, Gab, and Telegram, where far-right views are more prevalent and content moderation is comparatively low, saw dozens of posts echoing the view that the trial and verdict were intended to disrupt Trump’s election prospects. 

Real-world implications: Potential for violence?

While no specific incidents of violence have been linked to the verdict, political tensions remain high and growing exposure to these calls may drive intent to heed them. Far-right groups like Proud Boys and QAnon – present at the January 2021 riots and similar rallies – largely scaled back their activities and visibility in the aftermath of the Capitol Hill incident, but group members are again increasing their presence at pro-Trump campaign rallies, suggesting a willingness to mobilise. Although they are unlikely to have the capabilities and support to facilitate a similar riot, these groups, alongside Trump’s wider support base, could still engage in large-scale disruptive unrest with the potential for clashes with police and counter-protesters.  

There is also precedent for online threats to drive targeted physical attacks, often against individuals like politicians and judges. Already, users have attempted to identify and leak personal information of the 12 New York jurors involved in Trump’s conviction, exposing them and their families to attacks and harassment campaigns. According to the US Marshals Service, serious threats to US federal judges have more than doubled from 2021 to 2023, and some of these have progressed from verbal abuse to harassment, including parcels containing fake bombs, and envelopes of white powder. Responses to Trump’s 11 July sentencing and upcoming cases will certainly facilitate further threats against involved individuals.

Figure 1: Serious threats against federal judges rise, while trust and confidence in the judicial branch of the federal government wanes. Sources: US Marshals Service and Gallup.

Disinformation and distrust

Further to the potential for violence, reactions to Trump’s verdict have signalled an ongoing crisis of faith in democratic institutions and processes among his supporters. Mis- and disinformation circulating on social media, including among influential public figures, has amplified these fears. An anchor for the conservative-aligned Fox News station, for example, falsely posted on X that the judge in Trump’s trial had informed the jury they would not need to decide unanimously on a charge to find Trump guilty. The post received over 5.7 million views, prompting wider discussions in mainstream conservative media and circulation by Republicans like former Trump advisor and media presenter, Stephen Bannon. Even Trump denounced the judge’s alleged instructions to the jury as “unconstitutional, and unAmerican,” to the agreement of many supporters. These beliefs will continue eroding support for democratic systems and rule of law. Should Trump be re-elected, for instance, such sentiment would bolster support for his plans to deconstruct what he and his supporters view as the “Deep State.” To this end, Trump’s strategies range from threatening to prosecute political opponents to overhauling the civil service (which would significantly affect government functioning), and decreasing the independence for the Justice Department.

Democratic backsliding?

While grievances underlying the reactions to Trump’s verdict are nothing new, the ruling has served to calcify perceptions among many of his supporters that America’s institutions and incumbent democratic leadership are failing to uphold traditional values and rights in order to silence critical views ahead of the upcoming election. With senior figures encouraging these beliefs, a rising number of Trump supporters and other conservative voters could see merit in them, intensifying public dissatisfaction. A more immediate concern, however, is the potential for such political sentiment to overlap with calls for resistance, retaliation, and violence, emboldening targeted violence and incidents of unrest, particularly as election tensions mount.