United States v. Viefhaus

How courts have described this case

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

• “[A] statement may constitute a threat even though it is subject to a possible contingency in the maker’s control.”
• questions as to whether a statement is a true threat or political speech are for the jury
• “The ‘clear and present danger’ test . . . has been replaced by the ‘incitement’ test developed in Brandenburg [v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 (1969).]”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).