Texas AG Joins Multistate Legal Action Against Pro-Palestinian Groups Over Alleged Hamas Support
Texas AG Ken Paxton joins multistate coalition backing October 7 terror victims’ lawsuit against American Muslims for Palestine and National Students for Justice in Palestine
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has joined a multistate coalition filing an amicus brief in support of American and Israeli victims of Hamas’s October 7 terrorist attack. The victims and their families are suing two pro-Palestinian organizations accused of providing material support to the terrorist group.
The brief, filed on December 30, 2025, and led by attorneys general from Virginia and Iowa, targets American Muslims for Palestine (AMP) and National Students for Justice in Palestine (NSJP). The organizations allegedly declared themselves “part of” a “Unity Intifada” operating under Hamas’s “unified command” on October 8, 2023, just one day after Hamas’ assault on Israel that left more than 1,200 people dead, with hundreds more taken hostage.
“Radical Islamic terrorist groups like Hamas must be decimated and dismantled, and that includes their domestic supporting branches,” Paxton said in a statement. “Terrorism relies on complex networks and intermediaries, and the law must be enforced against those who knowingly provide material support.”
Legal Framework and Claims
The underlying lawsuit, filed in May 2024 by law firms Holtzman Vogel and Greenberg Traurig, represents survivors of the October 7 attack, family members of those murdered by Hamas, civilians under ongoing Hamas rocket fire, and individuals displaced by the terrorism. The plaintiffs are bringing claims under the federal Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA), which allows victims of international terrorism to seek monetary damages from those who provide material support to terrorist organizations.
Virginia Attorney General Jason Miyares, who co-led a 22-state coalition filing a similar brief in September 2024, argued that dismissing these claims before discovery “would undermine the ability of victims to receive compensation and prevent organizations like AMP and NSJP from being held accountable for their actions.”
The lawsuit alleges that AMP’s material support for Hamas spans decades, tracing back to predecessor organizations including the Holy Land Foundation (HLF), whose leaders were convicted in 2009 of funneling millions of dollars to Hamas. According to court documents, AMP was formed by former leaders of these defunct organizations, including individuals who served on HLF’s board.
Allegations of Post-October 7 Activities
Central to the lawsuit are actions allegedly taken by the organizations immediately following the Hamas attack. Plaintiffs point to NSJP’s release of a “Day of Resistance Toolkit” and statements the groups made declaring solidarity with Hamas’s “unified command.” The brief argues these actions constitute propaganda and recruitment efforts on behalf of a designated foreign terrorist organization.
“Hamas’s charter explicitly calls for its supporters to engage in communication and propaganda efforts on its behalf to join the battle,” the Virginia-led brief stated. “In the wake of the October 7 attack, Hamas leadership urged international supporters to rally. NSJP responded by releasing a ‘Day of Resistance Toolkit.’”
Broader Pattern of Legal Action
This amicus brief represents part of a broader pattern by Paxton’s office targeting seemingly innocuous Muslim advocacy organizations with alleged ties to terrorism. In December 2025, the Texas Attorney General defended Texas’s designation of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Muslim Brotherhood as foreign terrorist organizations following a proclamation by Texas Governor Greg Abbott.
As the case moves forward in federal court, judges will be asked to determine whether the allegations are sufficient to proceed to discovery, a decision that could have far-reaching implications for how U.S. law treats advocacy organizations accused of providing material support to designated terrorist groups.