By Rachel Raczka <\/p>\n
Boston.com Staff | 12.08.14 | 9:39 AM <\/p>\n
ICYMI the U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments last week about whether or not violent statements posted on social media are proof of intent to harm. And before you hit post on that status update about how Tommy So-and-So in your office is driving you so crazy you could strangle him, listen up. <\/p>\n
The case at hand involves an Allentown, Penn., man named Anthony Elonis, who posted violent rants and threats against his estranged wife, schoolchildren, and law enforcement on Facebook in 2010. He was found guilty of making threats and the court sentenced him to 44 months in prison. Elonis appealed to the Supreme Court, where he argued that he didnt actually intend for his words to be threatening. <\/p>\n
Words like this: <\/p>\n
Advertisement - Continue Reading Below <\/p>\n
If I only knew then what I know now\/I would have smothered your ass with a pillow\/Dumped your body in the back seat\/Dropped you off in Toad Creek and made it look like a rape and murder <\/p>\n
Not pretty. But heres the catchElonis claims these were rap lyrics. Rather than a threat, theyre just an expression of creativity and therefore protected by the First Amendment, just as they are for musicians and rappers who have garnered praise and awards for lyrics like these for years. Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr. even quoted Eminems 97 Bonnie and Clyde during the debate. <\/p>\n
The Supreme Court seems hung up on whether theres a difference in the creative liberties allowed to artists and those allowed to independent individuals. The intent of a statementwhether or not it is meant to incite fear and\/or violencehas been paramount in previous cases brought before the justices and the lower courts. Also, in some cases, its more about who the threats are directed atthe military, the President of the United States, your family and peers. Sometimes a test known as the Dinwiddie factors, which gauges the frequency, medium, and reaction to a said threat, is used to determine whether or not its valid. <\/p>\n
If the court decides that Eloniss intent was to show off his rap prowess and not to terrify two women and a bunch of children, it would set a problematic precedent, as Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. notes: <\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Read more from the original source: By Rachel Raczka Boston.com Staff | 12.08.14 | 9:39 AM ICYMI the U.S. Continue reading
\nThe Supreme Court Is Tackling Facebook, Rap Lyrics, and the First Amendment<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"