Supreme Court Raises Bar for Proving ‘True Threats’ in Social Media Cases

The Supreme Court has ruled in favor of a Colorado man who was convicted of making “true threats” to a local musician. The justices raised the bar for establishing when a statement is a “true threat” not protected by the First Amendment.

Writing for the majority, Justice Elena Kagan said that the jury should have been required to make a finding about whether Billy Counterman intended his comments to be genuine threats. The court wiped away a Colorado Court of Appeals’ ruling that upheld the conviction of Counterman and sent the case back for further proceedings consistent with its opinion.

The case centered around Counterman’s Facebook messages to singer-songwriter Coles Whalen. Counterman had sent numerous threatening messages to Whalen, leading to his conviction. However, the Supreme Court ruled that the conviction was based on the wrong legal standard.

The court said that if such messages are not true threats, they are deemed protected speech under the Constitution’s First Amendment. The ruling is seen as a victory for free speech advocates, who argued that the conviction was a violation of Counterman’s First Amendment rights.

The Supreme Court’s ruling is expected to have a major impact on how prosecutors handle cases involving threats made on social media. The decision will make it more difficult for prosecutors to prove that a statement is a true threat, and not just protected speech.