← All Authorities
United States Leading Case libel and slanderconvention rights

Counterman v Colorado

600 US 66 (2023)
JurisdictionUnited States
CourtUS Supreme Court
Year2023
StatusBinding authority

Summary

The First Amendment requires proof of at least recklessness as to the threatening nature of a statement for true threats prosecutions; objective negligence is insufficient.

Key Principle

The First Amendment requires proof of a subjective mental state (at least recklessness) for true threats prosecutions; negligence is insufficient (Justice Kagan).

Area of Law

constitutional

Related Cases

NZYQ v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs (2023) 97 ALJR 1005

Indefinite administrative detention of a non-citizen with no real prospect of removal is unlawful as punitive and contrary to Ch III of the Australian Constitution, overruling Al-Kateb v Godwin.

Farm Transparency International v NSW (2022) 276 CLR 81

HCA upheld NSW ag-gag laws as valid notwithstanding a burden on the implied freedom of political communication, applying the structured proportionality test.

Palmer v Western Australia (2021) 272 CLR 505

HCA upheld WA COVID-19 border closure legislation as valid under s.92, finding restrictions on interstate movement were reasonably necessary and proportionate to protect public health.

Ask CommonBench about this case

Get a detailed analysis of Counterman v Colorado and how it applies to your situation.

Explain Counterman v Colorado