Threatening Federal Official – 18 U.S.C. § 115 Sentencing Guidelines

Thanks for visiting Federal Lawyers, a second-generation firm managed by our lead attorney with over 40 years of combined experience. When federal prosecutors charge threatening a federal official under 18 U.S.C. § 115, they’re alleging you threatened to assault, kidnap, or murder a federal official, federal judge, or their family members because of their official duties or to influence their performance of those duties. Maximum sentence: **10 years** for threats to kill or kidnap; **6 years** for assault threats. The statute protects not just the officials themselves but also their immediate family members, recognizing that threats against families can be equally coercive in influencing official conduct. These prosecutions have increased with social media’s rise and heightened political polarization—angry constituents direct threats at judges, prosecutors, FBI agents, and other federal officials over controversial cases or policies.

Who § 115 Protects

The statute creates broad protections for federal personnel:

• **Federal officers and employees** – FBI agents, prosecutors, DEA agents, ATF agents, IRS agents, federal judges, immigration officials, U.S. Marshals, any federal employee performing official duties
• **Immediate family members** – Spouses, children, parents, siblings of federal officials. The statute recognizes threatening families can influence official conduct as effectively as threatening officials directly.
• **Former federal officials** – When threats are made because of prior official duties. Judges who sentenced defendants, prosecutors who tried cases, agents who conducted investigations—all retain § 115 protection for threats arising from their past work.

Defense challenges whether alleged victims actually were federal officials performing duties protected by § 115, or whether they acted in personal capacities unrelated to federal employment. An off-duty FBI agent involved in a bar fight isn’t a § 115-protected official if the confrontation had nothing to do with their federal role. The connection between threats and official duties must be established.

The “On Account Of” Element

Section 115 requires threats be made “on account of” or “with intent to retaliate against” official duties. Prosecutors must prove defendants threatened officials because of their federal roles, not for personal reasons unrelated to official conduct:

• *Threats over case outcomes* – Threatening judges who sentenced defendants harshly, prosecutors who secured convictions, agents who conducted arrests. These clearly satisfy “on account of official duties.”
• *Threats to influence future conduct* – “Drop the charges against my friend or I’ll kill you” explicitly links threats to official duties and demonstrates intent to influence.
• *Threats during official interactions* – Defendants who threaten IRS agents during audits, immigration officers during deportation proceedings, or U.S. Marshals during arrests threaten officials “on account of” their duties.

Defense presents evidence that threats arose from personal disputes unrelated to official roles—romantic relationships, financial disagreements, neighborhood conflicts. If the victim’s federal employment was incidental and threats weren’t motivated by official conduct, § 115 doesn’t apply.

Three Types of Threats

Section 115(a) criminalizes threats to:

DEFENSE TEAM SPOTLIGHT

Todd Spodek

Lead Attorney & Founder

Featured on Netflix's "Inventing Anna," Todd Spodek brings decades of high-stakes criminal defense experience. His aggressive approach has secured dismissals and acquittals in cases others deemed unwinnable.

NY Bar Admitted Multi-State Licensed Federal Courts

Meet the Full Team

(1) Assault

Threatening to assault federal officials or their families. Maximum: **6 years**. This covers threats to injure, attack, or harm physically—anything short of kidnapping or murder threats. “I’m going to beat you up for what you did” directed at a federal prosecutor because of a conviction violates this subsection.

Legal Scenario: What Would You Do?

Scenario

After a heated custody battle in family court, you posted on social media that the federal judge who issued a ruling against you 'deserves what's coming to him' and referenced knowing where he lives. Two days later, FBI agents showed up at your door with a warrant for your arrest under 18 U.S.C. § 115.

Can I really be charged with a federal crime for something I posted online when I was angry and never intended to actually harm anyone?

Attorney's Answer

Under 18 U.S.C. § 115, the government must prove you made a threat to assault, kidnap, or murder a federal judge or official with the intent to impede or retaliate against them for performing their official duties. After the Supreme Court's ruling in Counterman v. Colorado (2023), prosecutors must show you acted with at least reckless disregard that your statements would be perceived as genuine threats — a pure 'I didn't mean it' defense alone won't suffice if a reasonable person would view the posts as threatening. Sentencing under the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines for § 115 violations can range from 12 to 24 months at the low end, but if the threat involved a federal judge or included specific plans, enhancements under USSG §2A6.1 can push the guidelines range significantly higher. We need to immediately preserve all context around those posts and build a record showing your state of mind, because the difference between protected angry speech and a true threat often comes down to specificity, context, and whether you took any steps suggesting you meant to act on your words.

This is general information only. Contact us for advice specific to your situation.

(2) Kidnap

Threatening to kidnap officials or family members. Maximum: **10 years**. Threats to abduct, hold captive, or restrain unlawfully. “I know where your kids go to school” directed at a federal judge as implicit kidnapping threat might qualify if context demonstrates threatening intent.