Chief Justice John Roberts Jr. said the government needed to prove more than that a reasonable person would regard angry statements, posted on Facebook by a Pennsylvania man whose wife had left him, as a threat. But the court sidestepped providing guidance in disputes over the wide range of language uses in social media.
June 02, 2015 at 12:00 AM
1 minute read
WASHINGTON – The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday sided with a Pennsylvania man whose angry Facebook postings directed at his estranged wife landed him in jail for violating a federal law against communicating threats.
Chief Justice John Roberts Jr., writing for a 7-2 majority in Elonis v. United States, said the government needed to prove more than the defendant was negligent or that a reasonable person would regard the statements as a threat.
Presented by BigVoodoo
The New York Law Journal honors attorneys and judges who have made a remarkable difference in the legal profession in New York.
The premier educational and networking event for employee benefits brokers and agents.
The Legal Intelligencer honors lawyers leaving a mark on the legal community in Pennsylvania and Delaware.
Atlanta s John Marshall Law School is seeking to hire one or more full-time, visiting Legal WritingInstructors to teach Legal Research, Anal...
Shipman is seeking an associate to join our Labor & Employment practice in our Hartford, New Haven, or Stamford office. Candidates shou...
Evergreen Trading is a media investment firm headquartered in NYC. We help brands achieve their goals by leveraging their unwanted assets to...
MELICK & PORTER, LLP PROMOTES CONNECTICUT PARTNERS HOLLY ROGERS, STEVEN BANKS, and ALEXANDER AHRENS
