United States Supreme Court
135 S. Ct. 2001 (2015)
Elonis (defendant) posted violent language directed at his estranged wife online. Elonis was charged with making interstate threats in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 875(c). Section 875(c) did not contain any required mens rea. Elonis argued he did not violate section 875(c) because he did not intend to threaten anyone. The district court instructed the jury to use a reasonable person standard in determining whether Elonis’s postings constituted threats. Elonis was convicted. The court of appeals affirmed, holding that section 875(c) did not require intent to communicate a threat, but rather only an intent to communicate words that a reasonable person would deem a threat. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Roberts, C.J.)
Concurrence/Dissent (Alito, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.
Here's why 221,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,100 briefs, keyed to 189 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.