American University Criminal Law Brief Volume 7 Issue 2 Article 4 2012 What Were They Thinking?: Competing Culpability Standards For Punishing Threats Made To The President Craig Matthew Principe Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/clb Part of the Criminal Law Commons Recommended Citation Principe, Craig Matthew. "What Were They Thinking?: Competing Culpability Standards For Punishing Threats Made To The President." American University Criminal Law Brief 7, no. 2 (2012): 39-54. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Washington College of Law Journals & Law Reviews at Digital Commons @ American University Washington College of Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in American University Criminal Law Brief by an authorized editor of Digital Commons @ American University Washington College of Law. For more information, please contact
[email protected]. What Were They Thinking?: Competing Culpability Standards For Punishing Threats Made To The President CRAIG MATTHEW PRINCIPE1 I. INTRODUCTION Congress or members-of-Congress-elect.14 If this amendment passes, the scope of this statute would expand, from two to four 8 U.S.C. Section 871(a) criminalizes the act of persons at any given time to well over five hundred.15 Thus, the making threats to kill, injure, or kidnap the President debate over whether the “willfully” element of Section 871(a) of the United States and a few other officials who are requires a subjective or objective construction has taken on a close in the line of succession.2 In its 1970 panel and new significance and needs to be addressed in light of these 1 3 developments.