The Current Standards of Threats Under Federal Law

Abstract

This paper examines the evolving standard of threats and, specifically, the interpretation of threats under federal law, focusing on the pivotal case of Elonis v. United States. It addresses the debate over whether proof of intent to cause actual harm is necessary for conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 875(c), analyzing arguments regarding First Amendment rights, subjective intent, and the objective interpretation of threatening communications. In conclusion, the paper highlights the delicate balance between preserving free speech rights and addressing the risks associated with threats. It stresses the importance of considering societal context and the impact of communication technologies on legal interpretations, revealing the complex interplay between constitutional principles and modern-day challenges.