18 U.S.C. § 875 is a federal law that makes it illegal to transmit threatening communications in interstate or foreign commerce. This law was enacted to criminalize threats made across state lines or international borders, protecting people from harm caused by threatening communications sent through mail, phone calls, online messages, etc. Let’s break down what this law covers, penalties for violating it, defenses, and some examples.
There are a few key elements that make up an 18 U.S.C. § 875 violation:
The law covers any kind of threat made across state or national borders, whether through mail, phone call, email, social media, etc. The threat can be against any person and does not have to identify a specific victim. Simply making a general threat to kidnap or injure someone is enough, as long as the threat could reasonably be perceived as genuine.
Violating 18 U.S.C. § 875 can lead to:
Restitution to victims
Penalties tend to increase for repeat offenders or if the threat is against high-profile victims like politicians or judges. The law treats these threats very seriously.
There are a few defenses that may apply in 18 U.S.C. § 875 cases:
An experienced criminal defense lawyer can analyze the specifics of your case and build the strongest defense.
Here are some real cases prosecuted under 18 U.S.C. § 875:
As these examples show, online threats are prosecuted just as aggressively as threats sent through other means of communication across state lines. Law enforcement takes these cases very seriously.
There are certainly pros and cons to having a law like 18 U.S.C. § 875. On one hand, threatening speech can cause real fear and distress, so having legal recourse seems reasonable. People shouldn’t have to worry about dangerous threats from other states. But on the other hand, setting limits on speech starts down a slippery slope. It’s hard to define what counts as a “true threat” vs hyperbole. And the penalties seem disproportionately harsh in some cases.
Personally, I think the law is too broad as written. It would be better to limit threats to specific people, rather than general threats. And perhaps require some showing that the threat is credible based on the suspect’s means and opportunity. Otherwise it risks criminalizing speech that may be disturbing but not truly dangerous. But reasonable people can disagree on where to draw the line between free speech and threats.
The main takeaway is that online communications are treated the same as threats sent through other means across state lines. So think carefully before making any threatening statements, even if just intended as a joke. Prosecutors take these cases seriously, and claiming you didn’t really mean it is not a guaranteed defense.
If you find yourself accused under this statute, immediately consult with a criminal defense attorney experienced with these types of cases. An attorney may be able to get charges reduced or dismissed by raising free speech or mental state defenses. Don’t take chances – get professional representation.
Please feel free to email us any questions regarding services that we may assist you with. You may also contact us by mail, telephone or fax.