WASHINGTON In its first case testing the limits of free speech on social media, the Supreme Court showed little interest Monday in extending new protections to people who post messages threatening to kill or hurt others. <\/p>\n
The justices sharply questioned the lawyer for a Pennsylvania man who was sent to prison for posting on Facebook about killing his ex-wife and cutting the throat of an FBI agent who investigated the threat. <\/p>\n
Citing the 1st Amendment, attorney John Elwood said prosecutors should have been required to prove that the messages were not only perceived as threatening, but that his client, Anthony Elonis, intended to scare and intimidate the individuals. <\/p>\n
Elonis, a former amusement park worker, insisted that he did not mean to frighten his ex-wife and that the rants were merely a way to blow off steam. <\/p>\n
None of the justices appeared to agree. <\/p>\n
\"How does one prove what's in somebody else's mind?\" asked Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, returning to the bench just days after being hospitalized last week to treat a heart blockage. <\/p>\n
In this case, she said, a \"reasonable person [would] think that the words would put someone in fear.\" <\/p>\n
The case of Elonis vs. United States has drawn attention because the court's decision could further refine the outer limits of free speech in the digital age. <\/p>\n
As a legal matter, the case does not turn on the fact that the threats were made on Facebook or the Internet. But the spread of social media has led to an explosion of caustic speech and acerbic criticism that some may see as threatening. <\/p>\n
Most justices appeared to agree with a government lawyer who argued that online threats should to be taken as seriously as other threats. <\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
More: WASHINGTON In its first case testing the limits of free speech on social media, the Supreme Court showed little interest Monday in extending new protections to people who post messages threatening to kill or hurt others. The justices sharply questioned the lawyer for a Pennsylvania man who was sent to prison for posting on Facebook about killing his ex-wife and cutting the throat of an FBI agent who investigated the threat. Citing the 1st Amendment, attorney John Elwood said prosecutors should have been required to prove that the messages were not only perceived as threatening, but that his client, Anthony Elonis, intended to scare and intimidate the individuals Continue reading
\nSupreme Court probes limits of free speech in Facebook threats case<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"