The Supreme Court has reversed a lower court ruling in Elonis v. United States, a case involving free speech and social media, which determined a man should not be prosecuted for writing “threatening” posts on Facebook.
On Monday, the justices ruled 7-2 reversing the decision to convict Anthony Elonis, after finding that members of the jury were told they did not have to take the man’s mental state into consideration, and needed only to prove that a “reasonable person” would view Elonis’s Facebook posts as threats.
Elonis was imprisoned for three years for making numerous online threats to injure his co-workers, as well as his estranged wife, police officers, a kindergarten class, and an FBI agent.
One post that was used as part of the basis for Elonis’s indictment was an adaptation of a satirical sketch that he and his wife had watched together. In the actual sketch, called “It’s Illegal to Say…,” a comedian explains that it is illegal for a person to say that he wishes to kill the President, but not illegal to explain that it is illegal for him to say that. Elonis posted his own version of the sketch, substituting his wife for the President.
At the bottom of the post, Elonis included a link to the video of the original skit, and wrote, “Art is about pushing limits. I’m willing to go to jail for my Constitutional rights. Are you?”
Another one of Elonis’s posts talked about initiating a school shooting saying, “Hell hath no fury like a crazy man in a kindergarten class.”
Elonis argued that he didn’t intend a “true threat,” as he was posting under the rap persona “Tone Dougie,” and included disclaimers that his material was “fictitious,” and with no intentional “resemblance to real persons.”
The Supreme Court decided this case on statuary grounds, without ruling on the First Amendment issue. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the majority opinion, saying that prosecutors must prove Elonis made the Facebook posts for the purpose of issuing a threat, or with knowledge that they would be viewed as threats.
Roberts also received some attention during arguments last year when he asked how the law would apply to Eminem, and recited lyrics to “97 Bonnie and Clyde.”
Justice Alito voted with the majority, though he wrote a separate opinion saying the recklessness in which Elonis made the threatening statements should be sufficient to convict him.
Justice Thomas filed a dissenting opinion saying, “This failure to decide throws everyone from appellate judges to everyday Facebook users into a state of uncertainty.”
