United States v. Elonis’s Empirical Analysis
730 F.3d 321 · 2013
Citation profile
8 federal appellate · 1 district · 10 state decisions
Appellate journey
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 3231 · 18 U.S.C. § 871 (Presidential Threat Protection Act of 2000) · 18 U.S.C. § 875 · 28 U.S.C. § 1291
Relies on Jackson v. Virginia · Rav v. City of St Paul Minnesota · Watts v. United States · Virginia v. Black · Rogers v. United States
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“'a reasonable person would foresee that the statement would be interpreted by those to whom the maker communicates the statement as a serious expression of an intention to inflict bodily injury or take the life of an individual.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Boettger“'True threats' encompass those statements where the speaker means to communicate a serious expression of an intent to commit an act of unlawful violence to a particular individual or group of individuals.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. State v. Boettger“The reasonable-person standard winnows out protected speech because, instead of ignoring context, it forces jurors to examine the circumstances in which a statement is made * * *.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. People v. Bona
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.