Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
2016 Postmortem
In reply to the discussion: Finally: Obama uses the E word. [View all]Politicub
(12,165 posts)14. Sedition and the US legal code
Last edited Wed Sep 18, 2013, 06:37 PM - Edit history (4)
Let's hope the media know and report this.
On edit - 'by force" is the key modifier. While the behavior is seditious, it doesn't equate to a seditious conspiracy as defined in the US legal code - http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/uscode/18/I/115/2384
But I'm not a lawyer so I don't know if force always implies physical force.
As an aside, the US code re: sedition and treason is a really interesting read. I hadn't thought to look it up until seeing your post.
18 U.S.C. § 2385 : US Code - Section 2385: Advocating overthrow of Government reads as:
Whoever knowingly or willfully advocates, abets, advises, or teaches the duty, necessity, desirability, or propriety of overthrowing or destroying the government of the United States or the government of any State, Territory, District or Possession thereof, or the government of any political subdivision therein, by force or violence, or by the assassination of any officer of any such government; - See more at: http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/uscode/18/I/115/2385#sthash.vW7pvXnZ.dpuf
I'm including this section of the code since it has the words violence and force. Which begs the question - is there a different legal definition of force that doesn't include violence?
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
36 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Why do you think the founding fathers used the term all threats foreign and "DOMESTIC"
world wide wally
Sep 2013
#5
once i found a post where an Old Elm Tree poster said they'd kick my ass if they saw me, if not for
dionysus
Sep 2013
#36
I wish he would put information regarding the Exchanges on a scroll while he is talking...
libdem4life
Sep 2013
#3
Not to me. This is very strong language for a President to use against the other party. Yes, he
pnwmom
Sep 2013
#8
As I recall from the Clinton administration, the president gets to set the priorities about
JDPriestly
Sep 2013
#20