Chat with AI
Cengage Advantage Books: Business Law Today, The Essentials 11th Edition by Roger LeRoy Miller
Edition 11ISBN: 978-1305574793Cengage Advantage Books: Business Law Today, The Essentials 11th Edition by Roger LeRoy Miller
Edition 11ISBN: 978-1305574793 Exercise 1
Adapting Law to the Online Environment
Should Threats Made on Facebook Be Considered Free Speech
Many people say things on social media that they do not mean. Often, their statements are full of rage toward another person, a company, or a workplace-especially after a relationship ends or a firing occurs. Are such postings illegal, or are they protected as free speech That depends on whether the statements constitute a true threat.
Under a federal statute, anyone who "transmits in interstate or foreign commerce any communication containing any threat to kidnap any person or any threat to injure the person of another" has committed a crime. A conviction under this law can result in fines and/or imprisonment for up to five years. Because the Internet is obviously interstate, a person who communicates threats to kidnap or injure another via the Internet can potentially be convicted.
What Is a True Threat
A true threat is a statement in which the speaker means to communicate a serious intent to commit an unlawful, violent act against a particular person or group. The First Amendment does not protect speech that contains true threats, and thus the government can prohibit them.
Courts have differed on whether the standard for determining whether a statement is a true threat should be objective or subjective. The majority of courts apply an objective standard. Under this standard, the speaker must "knowingly and willfully" transmit a communication that a reasonable (or objective) person would find threatening. A subjective standard requires that the speaker must personally (subjectively) intend not only to transmit the communication but also to threaten the victim. Since subjective intent can be difficult to determine, this standard makes it more difficult to prosecute a person for posting threats on the Internet.
Anthony Elonis's Story
Anthony Elonis's wife, Tara, left him in 2010 and took their two young children. Elonis was upset and experienced problems at work. A coworker, Amber Morrissey, filed five sexual harassment reports against him. When Elonis posted a photograph of himself in a Halloween costume holding a knife to Morrissey's neck, he was fired from his job.
Elonis then began posting violent statements on his Facebook page, mostly focusing on his former wife. "There's one way to love you," he wrote, "but a thousand ways to kill you. I'm not going to rest until your body is a mess, soaked in blood and dying from all the little cuts. Hurry up and die, bitch...." Based on statements like these, the court issued a protective order to Tara. But Elonis continued to post statements about killing his wife and eventually was arrested and prosecuted for his online posts.
Were the Facebook Posts Free Speech
At trial, Elonis claimed the Facebook posts were rap lyrics, inspired by Eminem, which were a "therapeutic" way to deal with his problems. Elonis argued that he did not mean to seriously threaten Tara. (Tara testified, however, that Elonis had not listened to rap music during their marriage.)
Elonis was convicted of violating the statute after a jury trial and ordered to serve four years in prison. He appealed, and a federal appellate court affirmed his conviction. He appealed to the United States Supreme Court, which reversed and remanded the case for further proceedings. The Court ruled that it is not enough that a reasonable person might view the defendant's Facebook posts as threats (which is the negligence standard applied by the lower court). Elonis must have intended to issue threats or known that his statements would be viewed as threats to be convicted of a crime.
Critical Thinking
When should a statement made on social media be considered a true threat
Should Threats Made on Facebook Be Considered Free Speech
Many people say things on social media that they do not mean. Often, their statements are full of rage toward another person, a company, or a workplace-especially after a relationship ends or a firing occurs. Are such postings illegal, or are they protected as free speech That depends on whether the statements constitute a true threat.
Under a federal statute, anyone who "transmits in interstate or foreign commerce any communication containing any threat to kidnap any person or any threat to injure the person of another" has committed a crime. A conviction under this law can result in fines and/or imprisonment for up to five years. Because the Internet is obviously interstate, a person who communicates threats to kidnap or injure another via the Internet can potentially be convicted.
What Is a True Threat
A true threat is a statement in which the speaker means to communicate a serious intent to commit an unlawful, violent act against a particular person or group. The First Amendment does not protect speech that contains true threats, and thus the government can prohibit them.
Courts have differed on whether the standard for determining whether a statement is a true threat should be objective or subjective. The majority of courts apply an objective standard. Under this standard, the speaker must "knowingly and willfully" transmit a communication that a reasonable (or objective) person would find threatening. A subjective standard requires that the speaker must personally (subjectively) intend not only to transmit the communication but also to threaten the victim. Since subjective intent can be difficult to determine, this standard makes it more difficult to prosecute a person for posting threats on the Internet.
Anthony Elonis's Story
Anthony Elonis's wife, Tara, left him in 2010 and took their two young children. Elonis was upset and experienced problems at work. A coworker, Amber Morrissey, filed five sexual harassment reports against him. When Elonis posted a photograph of himself in a Halloween costume holding a knife to Morrissey's neck, he was fired from his job.
Elonis then began posting violent statements on his Facebook page, mostly focusing on his former wife. "There's one way to love you," he wrote, "but a thousand ways to kill you. I'm not going to rest until your body is a mess, soaked in blood and dying from all the little cuts. Hurry up and die, bitch...." Based on statements like these, the court issued a protective order to Tara. But Elonis continued to post statements about killing his wife and eventually was arrested and prosecuted for his online posts.
Were the Facebook Posts Free Speech
At trial, Elonis claimed the Facebook posts were rap lyrics, inspired by Eminem, which were a "therapeutic" way to deal with his problems. Elonis argued that he did not mean to seriously threaten Tara. (Tara testified, however, that Elonis had not listened to rap music during their marriage.)
Elonis was convicted of violating the statute after a jury trial and ordered to serve four years in prison. He appealed, and a federal appellate court affirmed his conviction. He appealed to the United States Supreme Court, which reversed and remanded the case for further proceedings. The Court ruled that it is not enough that a reasonable person might view the defendant's Facebook posts as threats (which is the negligence standard applied by the lower court). Elonis must have intended to issue threats or known that his statements would be viewed as threats to be convicted of a crime.
Critical Thinking
When should a statement made on social media be considered a true threat
Explanation
Verified
Verified
Generally, a true threat may be defined as a statement in which a person try to communicate a grievous purpose to commit socially and morally a wrong activity. Threat is considered as an unlawful and immoral activity which is executed to harm the society.
People often put their views on social media sites which are full of anger towards another community, people, firm or a workplace. These statements are difficult to interpret as it depends on the perspective of the person.
A statement made on social media is considered as a true threat when it is done knowingly and willfully. In such cases, the court applies objective standard that is court simply review the object of the person communicating a threat. If a person posting some illegal statements on social media sites which pose a threat to the other person, then the person can appeal in the court for protection.
People often put their views on social media sites which are full of anger towards another community, people, firm or a workplace. These statements are difficult to interpret as it depends on the perspective of the person.
A statement made on social media is considered as a true threat when it is done knowingly and willfully. In such cases, the court applies objective standard that is court simply review the object of the person communicating a threat. If a person posting some illegal statements on social media sites which pose a threat to the other person, then the person can appeal in the court for protection.
Cengage Advantage Books: Business Law Today, The Essentials 11th Edition by Roger LeRoy Miller
Why don’t you like this exercise?
Other Minimum 8 character and maximum 255 character
Character 255
