United States v. Kernell

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• “[T]he belief that a federal investigation directed at the defendant’s conduct might begin at some point in the future satisfies the ‘in contemplation’ prong.”
• “4chan is known for its culture of anonymous posting, and often contains content that is offensive or socially unacceptable.”
• “[T]he fact that different courts have interpreted a statute differently does not make the statute vague—if that were true, a circuit split over the interpretation of a criminal statute would by definition render the statute unconstitutional.”
• “Even if true, the fact that different courts have interpreted a statute differently does not make the statute vague—if that were true, a circuit split 28 over the interpretation of a criminal statute would by definition render the statute unconstitutional.”
• rejecting vagueness challenge to § 1519

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).