Tesla Takedown organizers have declared today as their largest global protest yet, urging thousands to converge at Tesla showrooms, dealerships, and charging stations to oppose Elon Musk’s decisions to cut government spending.
As these demonstrations have spread worldwide, so has the controversy. While many protestors carry clear, nonviolent messages, images of masked individuals engaging in violent acts—like throwing Molotov cocktails—have muddied the public perception. Social media and political figures are increasingly blurring the lines between peaceful protest and vandalism.
In recent statements, President Donald Trump labeled the attacks on Tesla property as “domestic terrorism” and even threatened severe penalties, while U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi vowed to prosecute those who allegedly orchestrate these crimes. These claims come despite evidence suggesting that many violent acts are the work of isolated offenders. Meanwhile, Musk himself has escalated the debate by accusing at least one peaceful protester of criminal behavior on his social platform X, deepening the controversy by conflating protest with vandalism and terrorism.
Experts warn that treating all anti-Tesla actions as criminal could have serious repercussions. Mike German, a former FBI special agent now at the Brennan Center’s Liberty and National Security Program, pointed out that broad counterterrorism measures often target First Amendment activities rather than actual violent extremists.
Throughout its rallies and on its website, the Tesla Takedown movement has maintained a commitment to nonviolence. The organizers’ goal is not to cause physical harm but to pressure supporters to divest from Tesla—by selling their cars, stock, and refusing to buy new vehicles. Natasha Purdum, one of the group’s organizers, explained, “Musk’s power comes from his wealth, and if we can drive down Tesla’s stock price, we hit him where it hurts. This is essential to curbing the fiscal excesses in our government.”
Image Credits: Rebecca Bellan
Musk’s wealth, largely derived from his 13% stake in Tesla—which is currently valued at around $107.8 billion out of Tesla’s overall $829 billion market cap—has enabled him to make massive financial moves, such as spending $44 billion to acquire Twitter. He has also donated over $260 million from his own pocket to political causes that supported Trump’s election.
Given his background as an FBI special agent with 16 years focusing on domestic terrorism, German is not surprised to see law enforcement closely monitoring these protests. Recent developments indicate that local police, alongside newly formed FBI terrorism task forces, may be deploying extensive surveillance measures—from photographing protesters and their vehicles to using informants and accessing private records—based solely on suspicions of terrorism.
German also emphasized that in the United States, law enforcement often prioritizes protecting corporate interests. “Corporations wield significant influence through their ties with elected officials and top law enforcement, so when protests challenge those interests, authorities tend to frame the issue as a law enforcement matter rather than addressing legitimate public concerns,” he explained.
While the FBI did not comment on any special measures for the protest weekend, the NYPD’s counterterrorism unit was observed at a New York City protest, tasked with preventing acts of arson and ensuring public safety.
Amidst this charged atmosphere, both Musk and the Trump administration have ramped up their rhetoric as at least 213 Tesla Takedown protests are scheduled worldwide—from locations in Colorado, Kentucky, and Texas to sites in Germany, Minnesota, and France—on March 29. During a recent appearance on Fox News’ “Special Report,” Musk declared that he and Trump would “go after…the ones providing the money, the ones pushing the lies and propaganda.”
NYPD’s counterterrorism unit told TC they were at a NYC Tesla protest to prevent violence like arson. Image Credits: Rebecca Bellan
Trump has suggested that the attacks on Tesla property were part of a coordinated effort to intimidate Musk, despite internal findings to the contrary. Musk has also hinted, without evidence, that some protest organizers received funding from ActBlue—a nonprofit known for supporting progressive causes. Meanwhile, Attorney General Bondi criticized Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-TX) for her comments at a virtual Tesla Takedown rally, accusing her of inciting further insurrection even though she called for nonviolence.
Mike German sees this escalated rhetoric as a familiar tactic by authorities to undermine protest movements by linking isolated violent incidents to a broader spread of radical ideas. In response, organizer Natasha Purdum advised participants to prioritize their safety: leave if you feel unsafe, follow local protest guidelines, avoid trespassing, comply with police orders, and keep a lawyer’s number handy.
Stephanie Frizzell, a Tesla Takedown organizer from Dallas, summed it up by stating, “Authoritarian regimes have a long history of equating peaceful protest with violence. Our movement remains committed to nonviolence, and although the aim is to silence us against Musk’s harmful actions, defending free speech is fundamental to democracy. We will not be deterred.
