Sheppard, White, Kachergus, & DeMaggio, P.A. Attorneys & Counselors At Law
Call us anytime.
During office hours, call 904-701-0589
After office hours, call 904-727-7191

Regular office hours are 7:30 a.m. to 6:30 p.m.

Facebook and Free Speech: What Constitutes a Threat in the Digital Age?

The Supreme Court of the United States is currently tackling a major issue: when do comments on social media cross the line from protected speech to illegal threats? See Elonis v. United States, Docket No. 13-983. In this modern age of Twitter, Facebook, chat-rooms, and other social media platforms, drawing the line between free speech and illegal threats is no simple task. 

The Supreme Court is considering the case of Anthony Elonis, who posted violent rap lyrics about murdering his estranged wife and slitting an FBI agent's throat on Facebook. Elonis was convicted and sentenced to four years in prison for making the comments, but he maintains that his posts were a way of venting his anger and that he did not intend to threaten anyone with the lyrics.

The question facing the Court is whether it matters what Elonis intended when he made the comments or whether his violent words would make a "reasonable person" feel threatened. The government argues that the speaker's intent is irrelevant: if a reasonable person would feel threatened by comments, the comments constitute a threat and are not protected speech. Elonis, on the other hand, says that this standard is too broad and would criminalize protected speech.

Elonis also argues that the subjective intent of the speaker is relevant when deciding if a threat has been made. If Elonis intended to threaten the life of his wife or the FBI agent, then his speech would be illegal, but if he merely intended to vent his frustration, then his actions are protected. According to Elonis, contextual evidence could be used to decide what the speaker meant to accomplish by making the comments. Elonis also argues that the government's "reasonable person" standard could result in the prosecution of teenagers who make sarcastic or spontaneous angry remarks on the Internet without the serious intention of carrying out their comments.

Punishing comments that a "reasonable person" would find threatening without regard for the speaker's intent appear to criminalize protected speech. The Internet is a place where commenters often make impulsive, crude, and sarcastic remarks. Disregarding the intent of the speaker could result in prison time for people who use social media without considering the impact of their comments on others.

It will be interesting to see if the Court protects First Amendment free speech by requiring proof of the speaker's subjective intent to threaten. The issue of whose intent matters, the speaker's or the reasonable listener's, will determine whether Elonis' violent Facebook comments are criminal or not. Whatever the Court decides, the result will certainly have significant consequences for social media and those who make and receive threatening remarks on the Internet.

No Comments

Leave a comment
Comment Information
email us for a response
  1. Martindale Hubbell AV Preeminent Peer Rated for highest level of Provisional Excellence 2016 Best Lawyers Best Law Firms US News 2016 American College of Trial Lawyers William J.Sheppard Best Lawyers Lawyer of the year 2014 The Florida Bar Board Certified Best Lawyers|Best Law Firms US News|Criminal Defense: White-Collor|Tier 1|Jacksonville|2017
  2. Best Lawyers Best Law Firms US News 2017 AV Martindale Hubbell Peer Review Rated For Ethical Standards and Legal Ability Super Lawyers Best Lawyers Linking Lawyers And Clients Worldwide

Sheppard, White, Kachergus, & DeMaggio, P.A. Attorneys & Counselors at Law.
215 N. Washington Street
Jacksonville, FL 32202

Phone: 904-701-0589
Phone: 904-727-7191
Fax: 904-356-9667
Map & Directions

Regular office hours are 7:30 a.m. to 6:30 p.m.

Back to top