Fact check: What were the consequences for those who made hanging threats against Mike Pence?

1. What the original claim asked and what we found that directly addresses it

The original question sought the consequences imposed on people who made hanging threats specifically targeting Mike Pence. A targeted search of the supplied reporting found no article or record that directly documents prosecutions, charges, convictions, or sentences tied to hanging threats naming Mike Pence. Instead, the materials include threats aimed at members of Congress generally, threats to institutions, and local arrests for inflammatory posts; none link consequences directly to threats against Pence himself. This absence means the claim cannot be confirmed or quantified from the provided sources ^{[5] [6] [1]}.

2. A closely comparable federal prosecution that resulted in prison time

A relevant precedent involved Ryder Winegar of New Hampshire, who threatened to hang six members of Congress if they did not support then-President Trump; that case resulted in a 33-month federal prison sentence, illustrating that federal prosecutors do pursue and secure significant punishment for violent threats against federal officials under statutes addressing threats and intimidation. The reporting on Winegar indicates prosecutors treated the statements as criminal threats sufficient for conviction and imprisonment, offering a concrete example of severe legal consequences in a factually similar context, though Pence was not named ^{[1] [2]}.

3. A case showing pretrial detention and denial of release after racially charged threats

Another comparable case concerned Kenneth R. Hubert, who left a voicemail to Representative Emanuel Cleaver containing a racial slur and asking, “How about a noose … around [your] neck?” That defendant faced criminal proceedings and was denied release, demonstrating a different but severe enforcement response when threats are explicit and target protected-class representatives. This case underscores that courts sometimes respond with detention or restrictive conditions when threats are deemed dangerous or likely to obstruct justice, though again it is not tied to Pence ^[3].

4. Recent 2025 arrests for threats that do not involve Pence but show investigative activity

Two September 2025 reports describe arrests tied to alleged threats or menacing posts: one arrest for a mass-violence threat against the University of Louisville involving Charlie Kirk posters, and a Tennessee man arrested for posting a meme deemed threatening in connection with a vigil. These incidents illustrate active law-enforcement responses to online or localized threats in 2025, but neither article documents threats against Mike Pence or resulting prosecutions for such an offense, so they cannot be used to substantiate consequences for Pence-targeted threats ^{[5] [6]}.

5. Grand juries and refusals to indict: evidence of uneven outcomes

A September 2025 article reports a federal grand jury declining to indict Paul Anthony Bryant on allegations he threatened National Guard members; the piece notes a broader pattern of grand juries sometimes refusing to indict in cases involving threats to federal officials. That development signals prosecutorial and grand jury discretion can produce divergent results—arrest and investigation do not guarantee indictment or conviction, and similar outcomes could apply in alleged threats to Pence depending on evidence and charging decisions ^{[4] [7]}.

6. Why outcomes vary: legal thresholds, evidence, and prosecutorial choices

The divergence in consequences across these samples reflects three legal realities: criminal liability for threats depends on specific statutory elements (intent, credible threat, interstate or federal nexus), prosecutors weigh evidence and policy priorities before charging, and grand juries exercise independent judgment on whether probable cause exists. Cases with clear, recorded threats and corroborating evidence have led to indictment and prison time, while cases with ambiguous intent or insufficient proof have ended without indictment or with pretrial decisions to detain or release ^{[1] [4] [3]}.

7. Bottom line and recommended next steps for verification

From the supplied reporting, there is no documented instance of people prosecuted specifically for hanging threats against Mike Pence; comparable cases show penalties ranging from arrest and detention to federal prison, while some investigations ended without indictment. To determine whether particular individuals who threatened Pence faced consequences, consult contemporaneous federal docket searches, Department of Justice press releases, or court records naming Pence as the target—those primary documents would provide definitive adjudication outcomes beyond the secondary reporting summarized here ^{[1] [4] [5]}.