Blog
How do conspiracy laws target everyday people?
How Conspiracy Laws Target Everyday People
Conspiracy laws are often used to target regular people going about their daily lives. Many don’t realize that agreements or discussions they have could potentially be charged as a conspiracy by law enforcement. It’s a little known fact that conspiracy charges are becoming more and more common against people without criminal histories.
Let’s look at some examples. Say your upset about corporations polluting the envirnment. You and some friends discuss ways you could protest and shut down a factory. Even if you don’t actually do anything illegal, just talking about potential illegal protests could result in conspiracy charges.
Another example is if you and your spouse decide to sell prescription drugs that were prescribed to your spouse to make some extra cash. Even just agreeing to do this is conspiracy to commit a crime. You don’t even have to go through with it to be charged[1].
There are many more examples of ways everyday people can find themselves charged with conspiracy without realizing it. Even discussing hypothetical crimes with no real intention to commit them could potentially lead to charges[2]. Its a little known fact that conspiracy laws are increasinly used to target regular people.
Broad Definition of Conspiracy
A major reason conspiracy laws end up targeting regular people is that the definition of conspiracy is extremely broad. Black’s Law Dictionary defines it as:
An agreement by two or more persons to commit an unlawful act, coupled with an intent to achieve the agreement’s objective, and (in most states) action or conduct that furthers the agreement; a combination for an unlawful purpose.
So all it takes is two people agreeing to commit a crime. They don’t even have to follow through with it. That agreement itself is the conspiracy crime. Obviously this definition could apply to major criminal organizations planning sophisticated crimes. But it equally applies to two friends discussing minor non-violent offenses.
The broadness of the conspiracy definition, coupled with the fact that it’s based solely on an agreement rather than actions, is why it can impact people going about their regular lives. Any agreement between friends or family members to do something illegal, even minor, could lead to charges.
Prevalence of Conspiracy Charges
Conspiracy charges are becoming increasingly common in the U.S. justice system. Approximately 29% of all federal criminal prosecutions involve conspiracy charges[3]. And between 2007 and 2016, conspiracy prosecutions grew by 37% [4].
With conspiracy charges on the rise, more regular people are getting caught up in the broad net these laws cast. While high-level organized crime figures are still prosecuted for conspiracy, so are many without criminal histories. For example, patients who discuss buying prescription drugs from each other, protesters coordinating civil disobedience, employees discussing embezzlement schemes, etc.
The prevalence of conspiracy charges means prosecutors have a powerful tool to go after questionable agreements between average people. Since just the agreement is the required element, it removes barriers to prosecution around actually commiting a crime.
Questionable Use of Conspiracy Laws
The broad nature of conspiracy laws, coupled with their growing use, has led to many questionable applications against everyday citizens:
- A county in Texas charged an attorney with conspiracy for advising her client on how to lawfully transfer custody of his child[5].
- Civil rights activists have been charged for discussing potential protests against government policies they disagreed with.
- The FBI charged environmental protesters with conspiracy to commit arson, even though they had not committed arson.
- Prosecutors charged a woman with conspiracy to distribute prescription drugs for texting her friend about getting Xanax.
These types of cases raise serious questions around conspiracy laws criminalizing free speech and lawful coordination. When prosecutors can go after discussions rather than actions, it gives them extremely broad powers.
Lack of Public Awareness
A major problem with conspiracy laws is the general public doesn’t understand them. Most people don’t realize that just discussing or planning certain crimes with friends could lead to prosecution. There is a common misconception that conspiracy requires actually commiting a crime.
The public’s lack of understanding of conspiracy laws enables their questionable use. If more citizens realized activities they consider harmless could lead to prosecution, there might be more pressure to reform these laws. As it stands, people are often shocked when they end up charged for discussions rather than actions.
Disproportionate Punishments
Another issue with conspiracy laws is disproportionate sentencing. Conspiracy often carries the same penalties as actually commiting the crime. For example, someone charged with conspiracy to distribute drugs would face the same punishment as if they had distributed those drugs.
These harsh sentences for inchoate crimes highlight how conspiracy laws target intentions rather than actions. There are instances where major criminal organizations should face conspiracy charges and penalties. But sentencing average people to years in prison for discussions without associated criminal acts seems ethically dubious. It also contributes to mass incarceration.
Lack of Constitutional Protections
Courts have also eroded Constitutional protections when it comes to conspiracy charges. Agreements between individuals have been protected under the First Amendment freedom of association. However, courts have made exceptions when those agreements relate to criminal acts, even minor non-violent ones.
Additionally, hearsay evidence is usually prohibited in criminal trials. But hearsay evidence has been permitted in conspiracy cases, enabling prosecutors to more easily secure convictions. The justification is that conspirators are partners-in-crime, so one person’s statements can be attributed to the other members.
These exceptions mean Constitutional barriers to prosecution are lowered when conspiracy charges are involved. Prosecutors have more leeway to pursue questionable conspiracy cases using a lower standard of evidence.
Lack of Overt Acts
Here’s another aspect of conspiracy laws that demonstrates how they target intentions rather than actions – many don’t require an overt act. Federal conspiracy laws and roughly half of states do not require an overt act to prosecute conspiracy.
This means people can face harsh conspiracy penalties even if there is no evidence they took any steps to further the conspiracy. Some states, like California, have imposed overt act requirements to limit inchoate conspiracy prosecutions. However, the lack of an overt act component federally and in many states enables conspiracy prosecutions based solely on discussions.
Recommendations for Reform
Given the issues around conspiracy laws, here are some recommendations for reform:
- Require an overt act for all conspiracy prosecutions – Agreements to commit a crime should not be enough without evidence of steps taken to further the conspiracy.
- Limit conspiracy prosecutions to major crimes – Using conspiracy laws against non-violent, minor agreements raises civil liberties issues.
- Reduce sentencing disparities between conspiracy and completed crimes – Penalties solely for inchoate agreements should be less than for completed criminal acts.
- Increase public awareness – More education is needed so everyday people understand what activities could lead to conspiracy charges.
- Strengthen Constitutional protections – Reverse court rulings that weakened free speech and due process in conspiracy cases.
While conspiracy is a real problem in major criminal enterprises, current laws enable misuse against average citizens. Reforms are needed to limit conspiracy prosecutions to serious criminal agreements coupled with overt acts. This would help prevent chilling of free speech and questionable targeting of individuals going about their daily lives.
The Bottom Line
Conspiracy laws play an important role in the justice system for targeting dangerous criminal organizations. However, their broad nature, lack of overt act requirements, harsh sentences, and weakened Constitutional barriers enable misuse against everyday people. Until reforms are enacted, ordinary citizens are at risk of getting caught up in the ever-expanding net of conspiracy prosecutions.
[1] https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1549&context=wmborj
[2] https://ps.psychiatryonline.org/doi/10.1176/appi.ps.202000348
[3] https://www.justice.gov/archives/jm/criminal-resource-manual-923-18-usc-371-conspiracy-defraud-us
[4] https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/03/18/federal-prosecution-of-white-collar-crime-continues-to-rise/
[5] https://reason.com/volokh/2021/05/13/mother-arrested-for-conspiracy-for-helping-her-son-challenge-the-custody-of-his-child/
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/dec/29/fbi-coordinated-crackdown-occupy
https://theintercept.com/2019/10/02/fbi-conspiracy-theories-terrorism/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/true-crime/wp/2016/09/02/a-text-message-about-buying-drugs-led-to-a-mans-arrest-on-federal-conspiracy-charges/
https://sgp.fas.org/crs/misc/R41223.pdf
https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/amendment-1/freedom-of-association
https://www.justice.gov/archives/jm/criminal-resource-manual-2413-hearsay-statements-co-conspirators
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/conspiracy
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=PEN§ionNum=184.