Your fact-checks will appear here
A court case that prompted a certiorari fight regarding the interpretation of 18 U.S.C. § 111.
Federal appellate courts are actively divided over whether 18 U.S.C. § 111 requires “assaultive” conduct (including threatening or menacing conduct that creates an apprehension of harm) as an element ...
Federal courts in the last five years have fractured on whether C. § 111 requires “assault” as an essential element and how broadly the adjective “forcibly” reaches non‑contact conduct; some courts an...
Federal courts are sharply split over whether common‑law simple assault is an element of : some circuits treat § 111 convictions as requiring at least some form of assaultive conduct, while others all...
Three federal circuits have held that 18 U.S.C. § 111 requires proof of the common‑law offense of simple assault as an element of at least some § 111 prosecutions, while at least four other circuits h...