Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →
Jamal Knox v. Pennsylvania
Paid petition · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, Western District, No. 3 WAP 2017 · judgment August 21, 2018
Before the decision, well below the 4.1% base rate, with no standout signals pointing toward a grant.
Question presented
Under Watts v. United States, 394 U.S. 705 (1969) (per curiam), the First Amendment does not protect “true threats.” Federal courts of appeals and state high courts are deeply divided over the legal standard for determining whether a statement is a true threat. A majority of courts have held that the standard is objective and requires a showing that a “reasonable person” would regard the statement as a sincere threat of violence. But other courts have held that the standard is subjective and assess only whether the speaker intended to communicate such a threat. This Court granted certiorari to address this issue in Elonis v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 2001 (2015), but did not resolve the split, prompting concern that “the Court has compounded—not clarified—the confusion,” id. at 2014 (Alito, J., concurring and dissenting). A divided Pennsylvania Supreme Court below acknowledged this split and joined the short end of it, holding that a statement can constitute a true threat based solely on the speaker’s subjective intent. The court thus affirmed petitioner’s convictions for terroristic threats and witness intimidation based on a rap song that petitioner, a rap music artist, wrote and recorded. The court below found it irrelevant whether a reasonable person would find the song threatening in context. The question presented is whether, to establish that a statement is a true threat unprotected by the First Amendment, the government must show that a “reasonable person” would regard the statement as a sincere threat of violence, or whether it is enough to show only the speaker’s subjective intent to threaten.
Counsel of record
For petitioner
Robert Stanton Jones
Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP
For respondent
Francesco L. Nepa
Allegheny County Office of the District Attorney
Proceedings
- Apr 15 2019Motion for leave to file amici brief filed by Michael Render, et al. GRANTED.
- Apr 15 2019Motion for leave to file amicus brief filed by National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers GRANTED.
- Apr 15 2019Motion for leave to file amici brief filed by Cato Institute, et al. GRANTED.
- Apr 15 2019Motion for leave to file amici brief filed by Art Scholars and Historians GRANTED.
- Apr 15 2019Petition DENIED.
- Mar 20 2019DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/12/2019.
- Mar 12 2019Reply of petitioner Jamal Knox filed.
- Mar 06 2019Motion for leave to file amicus brief filed by National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers.
- Mar 06 2019Motion for leave to file amici brief filed by Cato Institute and The Rutherford Institute.
- Mar 06 2019Motion for leave to file amici brief filed by Michael Render ("Killer Mike"),Erik Nielson, and Other Artists and Scholars and other Artists and Scholars.
- Mar 06 2019Motion for leave to file amici brief filed by Art Scholars and Historians.
- Mar 05 2019Affidavit of service and certificate of word count filed with respect to brief in opposition of respondent Pennsylvania.
- Feb 28 2019Brief of respondent Commonwealth of Pennsylvania in opposition filed.
- Feb 04 2019Response Requested. (Due March 6, 2019)
- Jan 30 2019DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/15/2019.
- Jan 25 2019Blanket Consent filed by Petitioner, Jamal Knox.
- Jan 22 2019Waiver of right of respondent Commonwealth of Pennsylvania to respond filed.
- Jan 18 2019Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due February 21, 2019)
- Nov 07 2018Application (18A492) granted by Justice Alito extending the time to file until January 18, 2019.
- Nov 05 2018Application (18A492) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from November 19, 2018 to January 18, 2019, submitted to Justice Alito.