"It’s a decision which, according to Danielle Citron, a professor of law at University of Maryland and author of the book Hate Crimes in Cyberspace, upends how courts have ruled on these issues in the past and leaves many questions unanswered as to how they should proceed in the future.
“The Supreme Court basically just said nine courts of appeals are wrong,” Citron says.
For Citron, this does not come as a surprise. The concept of mens rea, Latin for “guilty mind,” is found through criminal law. That courts have not had to prove a defendant’s intent in threat cases until now, is actually the exception, Citron says, not the rule.
“The question the jury has to wrestle with is not a bizarre thing,” she says. “If you’re going to be thrown into prison for any length of time, you’ve got to have some moral culpability.”"
- Date Published:06/02/2015
- Original Publication:Wired