NATIONALLY RECOGNIZED FEDERAL LAWYERS
What is threatening federal official
|Thanks for visiting Spodek Law Group. This is a second-generation law firm managed by Todd Spodek – with over 40 years of combined experience. We’ve represented clients in some of the most high-profile cases you’ve probably heard about, like the Anna Delvey Netflix series, the Ghislaine Maxwell juror misconduct case, and defending someone accused of stalking Alec Baldwin. If you’re reading this, you’re probably dealing with a federal charge that involves threats against a federal official – and you need to understand what prosecutors are actually trying to prove.
Threatening a federal official is a federal crime under 18 U.S.C. § 115. The statute covers threats against federal judges, prosecutors, law enforcement agents, IRS officials, and their family members. You don’t need to carry out the threat. You don’t even need to intend to carry out the threat. All prosecutors need is proof that you communicated something that a reasonable person would perceive as a credible threat – and that you did it to influence, impede, or retaliate against that official’s duties.
Prosecutors in 2025 are bringing these charges at record rates. In the first half of 2025, more than 30 people were federally charged with threatening a public official. According to research from the Combating Terrorism Center at West Point, federal prosecutions for threats against officials have nearly doubled in the last six years compared to the previous four years.
What Prosecutors Have to Prove
Federal prosecutors need to establish two elements beyond a reasonable doubt. First, you threatened to assault, kidnap, or murder a federal official or their family member. Second, you did so with intent to impede, intimidate, interfere with official duties, or retaliate against official actions.
The threat can be a letter mailed from prison, like Nathanael Michael West did when he sent graphic descriptions threatening to torture and murder a federal judge and prosecutor in Idaho – he got 8 years in federal prison in August 2025. The threat can be an internet post, a voicemail, a manifesto printed at your local library. It doesn’t matter how you communicate it.
What matters is whether a reasonable person would view your words as a “true threat” – a statement intended to cause fear of harm. You don’t need the ability or actual intent to carry it out. The government just needs to prove you intentionally or knowingly communicated something threatening. That distinction destroys a lot of defenses. Saying “I didn’t really mean it” or “I was just venting” won’t save you if prosecutors can show you knowingly sent the message.
Who’s Protected Under the Statute
The statute protects federal judges, U.S. Attorneys and Assistant U.S. Attorneys, FBI agents, DEA agents, IRS Revenue Agents, federal probation officers – basically any federal official performing official duties. It also covers their immediate family members.
Some defendants think they can avoid liability by targeting an official’s spouse or children instead of the official directly. That’s explicitly covered under the statute. Jonathan Reed Stiltner from Virginia mailed threats to a federal judge, probation officer, prosecutor, and public defender – he got 3.5 years in prison in August 2025.
Federal law enforcement doesn’t tolerate these cases. The FBI investigates, the U.S. Attorney’s Office prosecutes, and federal judges impose serious prison time. These aren’t state misdemeanors that get pleaded down to probation.
Sentencing Reality in 2025
Maximum penalties under 18 USC 115 are harsh. Threatened assault carries up to 6 years in federal prison. Threats to kidnap or murder carry up to 10 years. Actual assault with physical contact can get you up to 10 years. Assault with a dangerous weapon goes up to 30 years. Each violation is a separate count, so multiple threats stack quickly.
Defendants with criminal history get hammered. Charles Morice Gilmore received the statutory maximum of 10 years for mailing threatening communications plus 6 years for influencing a federal official by threat in February 2025. Michael Dean Drew got 20 years for sending letters from Florida state prison threatening to kill federal judges, U.S. Marshals, and prosecutors.
Robert Phillip Ivers was arrested in Minnesota in September 2025 after police found him printing 20 copies of a spiral-bound book titled “How to Kill a Federal Judge” at a public library, along with lists of federal judges in his vehicle. Ivers had already been convicted in 2019 for threatening a federal judge. Most defendants sentenced in 2025 are getting at least 5 years, with many receiving 8-10 years or more.
Why Federal Officials Are Different
Federal officials are protected by federal law – which means federal resources, federal investigation, federal prosecution, federal sentencing, and federal prison. State courts can’t touch these cases.
The DOJ prioritizes these prosecutions because they view threats against officials as attacks on the judicial system itself. Acting U.S. Attorney Nancy Larson said in October 2025: “The safety of our federal judiciary is paramount. Threats of violence to our judges are becoming all too common – whether made online or in person.”
Prosecutors aren’t looking for cooperation deals in these cases the way they might in drug conspiracies or fraud cases. You’re the defendant who threatened a judge or prosecutor – often the same prosecutors or judges handling your case. There’s no 5K1.1 substantial assistance motion coming. The best outcome is usually damage control and minimizing the sentence.
First Amendment Defenses Rarely Work
Defendants charged under 18 USC 115 frequently argue their statements are protected political speech under the First Amendment. Courts reject this defense almost universally when the statement constitutes a “true threat.” Constitutional protections for free speech don’t extend to threats that would cause a reasonable person to fear violence.
Political opinions, criticism of government officials, even harsh or inflammatory rhetoric – those are protected. But when you cross the line into threatening violence against a specific federal official to interfere with their duties or retaliate against them, you’ve committed a federal crime. The line isn’t always clear until you’ve already crossed it.
Federal prosecutors excel at proving intent. They’ll introduce evidence of your internet search history, prior statements, social media posts, everything that shows you knew what you were doing when you sent that threat. They’ll show the jury exactly how you researched the official’s address, workplace, family members.
Why You Need Experienced Federal Defense
At Spodek Law Group, we handle federal criminal cases that other firms won’t touch. Many of the cases we’re famous for handling – are cases that others say were unwinnable. Todd Spodek is a seasoned criminal defense attorney – who has many, many, years of experience as a second-generation criminal defense lawyer.
If you’ve been contacted by the FBI about threatening communications, if you’ve been arrested and charged, if you’re under investigation – time matters. Federal investigators are gathering evidence right now. Every day you wait is another day they’re strengthening their case against you.
Threat cases against federal officials are serious. The sentences are long, the scrutiny is intense, and federal judges don’t show much sympathy to defendants who threatened their colleagues. But that doesn’t mean you’re without options. Early intervention, strategic defense planning, presenting mitigation evidence at sentencing, challenging the government’s characterization of your intent – that’s what experienced federal defense attorneys do.
Our firm has represented clients in cases that generated national media coverage – NY Post, Newsweek, Bloomberg, Fox 5, Business Insider. We’re available 24/7. If you’re facing charges under 18 USC 115 for threatening a federal official, contact us. We’ll fight for the best possible outcome given your situation.