Sedition Prosecutions Under Federal Statutes
Overview: Sedition Under Federal Law
Legal Framework
18 U.S.C. § 2384 — Seditious Conspiracy
18 U.S.C. § 2385 — Advocating Overthrow of Government (Smith Act)
18 U.S.C. § 371 — Conspiracy to commit offense or defraud the U.S. (often used with sedition charges)
Sedition prosecutions involve showing that defendants conspired or acted to use force against the government or to obstruct its lawful functions.
Important Case Law Examples
1. Dennis v. United States (1951)
Court: U.S. Supreme Court
Facts:
Leaders of the Communist Party USA were prosecuted under the Smith Act for advocating the violent overthrow of the government.
Issues:
Whether mere advocacy of overthrow without immediate action violates the Smith Act.
Outcome:
Conviction upheld; Court ruled that advocacy of overthrow as a clear and present danger is punishable.
Significance:
Set precedent that speech advocating violent overthrow can be criminal if it poses a real threat.
2. Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969)
Court: U.S. Supreme Court
Facts:
A Ku Klux Klan leader was convicted for speech that encouraged illegal activity.
Issues:
Whether advocacy of violence in abstract, without imminent lawless action, is protected speech.
Outcome:
Conviction overturned; Court ruled speech is protected unless it incites imminent lawless action.
Significance:
Narrowed sedition laws’ application, requiring imminent threat for prosecution.
3. United States v. Rahman (1995)
Court: Federal District Court, New York
Facts:
Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman and others plotted violent attacks to overthrow the government and terrorize.
Charges:
Seditious conspiracy under 18 U.S.C. § 2384.
Outcome:
Convicted; multiple life sentences imposed.
Significance:
One of the most significant post-9/11 sedition prosecutions tied to terrorism.
4. United States v. Khatami (2009)
Court: Federal Court
Facts:
Defendants plotted to overthrow the Iranian government but were prosecuted in the U.S. for seditious conspiracy due to plans involving attacks on U.S. soil.
Charges:
Seditious conspiracy, weapons charges.
Outcome:
Convictions secured; lengthy sentences.
Significance:
Shows sedition prosecutions can involve conspiracies linked to foreign governments impacting U.S. security.
5. United States v. Stewart Rhodes (2022)
Court: Federal Court
Facts:
Leader of the Oath Keepers militia charged with seditious conspiracy for organizing the January 6 Capitol attack.
Charges:
Seditious conspiracy under 18 U.S.C. § 2384.
Outcome:
Convicted; sentenced to 18 years.
Significance:
Modern high-profile sedition case emphasizing violent attempts to disrupt government functions.
Summary Table
| Case | Defendants | Charges | Outcome | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dennis v. U.S. (1951) | Communist Party leaders | Smith Act (advocacy) | Convictions upheld | Advocacy punishable if clear & present danger |
| Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969) | KKK leader | Criminal syndicalism | Conviction overturned | Protected speech unless imminent lawless action |
| U.S. v. Rahman (1995) | Terrorists | Seditious conspiracy | Convicted, life sentences | Post-9/11 terrorism-related sedition |
| U.S. v. Khatami (2009) | Foreign-linked conspirators | Seditious conspiracy | Convicted | Sedition linked to foreign threats |
| U.S. v. Stewart Rhodes (2022) | Militia leader | Seditious conspiracy | Convicted, 18 years | Capitol riot sedition prosecution |
RELATED Blog
0 comments