Interstate Threatening Communications – 18 U.S.C. § 875 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 interstate threatening communications under 18 U.S.C. § 875, they’re alleging you transmitted threats via interstate or foreign commerce—phone calls, emails, text messages, social media posts, or any electronic communication crossing state lines—to kidnap, injure, or extort. Maximum sentence: 5 years for most threats; 20 years for ransom demands. This statute is the modern workhorse for federal threat prosecutions, replacing § 876 (mail threats) in the internet age. Nearly every electronic threat crosses state lines given how telecommunications infrastructure operates, making § 875 applicable to virtually all online and phone-based threats.

\n\n

What § 875 Criminalizes

\n\n

The statute creates four distinct offenses:

\n\n

§ 875(a): Ransom Demands

\n\n

Transmitting ransom demands for kidnapping victims via interstate commerce. Maximum: 20 years. This covers actual kidnappings where perpetrators demand payment electronically—emails demanding bitcoin for hostages’ release, calls to families demanding wire transfers, messages to companies demanding payment for executives’ safety.

\n\n

§ 875(b): Threat to Kidnap

\n\n

Transmitting threats to kidnap any person. Maximum: 5 years. Threatening to abduct victims, their children, or others—”I’m going to take your kid” emails, texts threatening to kidnap unless demands are met, social media posts threatening abduction.

\n\n

§ 875(c): Threat to Injure

\n\n

Transmitting threats to injure recipients or others. Maximum: 5 years. This is the most commonly charged subsection, covering death threats, assault threats, threats of property damage sent electronically. “I’m going to kill you” emails, threatening texts, violent social media messages all violate § 875(c).

\n\n

§ 875(d): Extortion by Threat

\n\n

Transmitting extortionate threats—communications threatening injury to person or property to extort money or anything of value. Maximum: 2 years. “Pay me $10,000 or I’ll destroy your business” emails, threats to reveal embarrassing information unless paid, blackmail schemes conducted electronically.

\n\n

The offense level differences reflect perceived harm: ransom demands in actual kidnappings warrant 20 years because lives are immediately at risk. Extortion receives lower maximums than pure threats because extortion requires willingness to not harm if paid, suggesting less dangerous intent than threats seeking no payment.

\n\n \n\n

The Interstate Commerce Element

\n\n

Section 875 requires threats be transmitted “in interstate or foreign commerce.” What does this mean?

\n\n

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

\n
• Phone calls – Nearly all phone calls use infrastructure crossing state lines, even local calls. Interstate commerce is presumed for telephonic communications.

\n

• Emails – Email servers route messages through multiple states regardless of sender/recipient locations. Federal jurisdiction attaches to virtually all emails.

\n

Legal Scenario: What Would You Do?



Scenario

After a heated argument with your ex-spouse who lives in another state, you sent a series of angry text messages saying you would 'make them regret everything' and 'destroy their life.' Two weeks later, FBI agents showed up at your door with a federal complaint charging you under 18 U.S.C. § 875(c) for transmitting threatening communications in interstate commerce.

Can I really face federal charges just for angry text messages sent during an emotional moment?

Attorney's Answer

Yes—under 18 U.S.C. § 875(c), transmitting any communication containing a threat to injure another person across state lines is a federal offense carrying up to five years in prison. However, after the Supreme Court's ruling in Counterman v. Colorado (2023), prosecutors must prove you acted with at least reckless disregard that your words would be perceived as genuine threats, which raises the bar beyond mere careless language. The sentencing guidelines under U.S.S.G. § 2A6.1 set a base offense level of 12, but enhancements can apply if the threat involved a demand for money, targeted a government official, or caused substantial disruption. We would immediately challenge whether your messages constitute 'true threats' under the First Amendment and work to demonstrate they were emotional venting rather than genuine expressions of intent to harm.

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

• Text messages – SMS routing crosses state lines, satisfying interstate commerce requirements.

\n

• Social media – Posts on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, TikTok travel through servers in multiple states and countries, creating interstate commerce.

\n

• Direct messages – Even private DMs on platforms use interstate infrastructure.

\n

\n\n

Defense rarely succeeds in challenging the interstate commerce element. Modern telecommunications make it nearly impossible to communicate electronically without crossing state lines. Courts presume interstate commerce when any electronic medium is used.