You open Instagram for a little mindless scrolling, then spot a comment you can’t resist answering. One reply turns into five. Now you’re arguing with a stranger, and neither of you is willing to let the other have the last word. It’s familiar internet territory – until someone threatens to take the fight offline.
Can words on a screen get you arrested or charged with a crime? Yes, but not every angry Facebook post is illegal. The line between venting and criminal threats of violence depends on context and the speaker’s state of mind.
A recent Alabama case illustrates how an online post can become evidence in a federal investigation.
A Workplace Rant Reaches the FBI
According to an FBI affidavit filed earlier this month, Baldwin County resident Jacob Christian Merrell posted an Instagram video complaining about cleaning up after his coworkers. The alleged complaint quickly escalated: “Tomorrow when I get to work, I’m killing all of them. I’m shooting them all with a gun.”
The affidavit says Meta voluntarily alerted the FBI and supplied account information, IP address and device records, and a copy of the video. An FBI agent reported reviewing the footage and identifying Merrell as the speaker. The agent requested a criminal complaint and arrest warrant for threatening interstate communications under 18 U.S.C. § 875(c).
The affidavit lays out the FBI’s allegations and the evidence offered to support a criminal complaint and arrest warrant. It is not proof of guilt, and the allegations would still need to be proved in court to obtain a conviction. Although the affidavit quotes statements about shooting coworkers, it does not say investigators found a gun or establish that Merrell actually planned to carry out the alleged threat.
Your Audience May Include Law Enforcement
Your followers may not be the only ones paying attention to your online communications. Between the vacation photos and arguments about air fryers, Meta uses automated systems, human reviewers, and user reports to spot content that may violate its rules – including threats and intimidation.
Some posts can make the leap from a moderation queue to a police investigation. Social media companies may provide account records in response to lawful requests or emergency requests involving imminent danger.
That doesn’t mean every angry comment gets forwarded to the FBI, or that someone at Meta personally reads everything you post. The affidavit doesn’t explain how the video first came to Meta’s attention. What it does show is that investigators can receive more than a screenshot: a platform can supply the alleged threat alongside account and device records that help put a name to the person behind it.
Venting or a Criminal Threat?
“I hate cleaning up after my coworkers” is a complaint. Announcing that you will shoot them tomorrow raises a very different question.
The free speech clause of the First Amendment protects much offensive speech, exaggeration, and joking. It does not protect “true threats”: serious expressions conveying an intent to commit unlawful violence against someone. Courts consider words in context, rather than treating every unpleasant sentence as criminal.
The speaker’s mindset matters, too. In Counterman v. Colorado, the Supreme Court held that a true-threat prosecution requires proof of at least recklessness about the statement’s threatening nature. In plain English, the speaker must consciously disregard a substantial risk that others will understand the communication as threatening violence. A reasonable listener’s reaction, standing alone, is not enough for a conviction. Particular criminal laws may require more.
Importantly, intending to threaten someone is different from intending to follow through. Prosecutors need not establish an actual plan to attack merely to satisfy the constitutional true-threat standard. Conversely, “I was joking” is not a magic phrase that ends the inquiry. Context and the required mental state still matter.
Online threats can lead to felony charges under federal law. Transmitting threats to kidnap or injure someone in interstate or foreign commerce can carry up to five years in prison, a fine, or both. State laws may also apply, sometimes under the label “terroristic threats.” As FindLaw’s article “What Are Terroristic Threats?” explains, that label does not necessarily mean someone is accused of committing an act of terrorism.
Cyberbullying, the act of online harassment, can also land you in hot water. Although there are no federal cyberbullying laws, many states have penalties that can result in fines or jail time.
What If You Receive an Online Threat?
If you’re on the receiving end of an online threat, your safety comes first. Call 911 if you are in immediate physical danger. Otherwise, promptly notify local law enforcement. For threats associated with a federal crime, you can also contact the FBI at 1-800-CALL-FBI.
Once you’re safe, resist the understandable urge to delete the message and never look at it again. Preserve the original communications and save screenshots or copies showing the threatening words, the sender, and the date and time. You can also report the content to the platform, but that’s an additional step, not a substitute for contacting police. A moderation queue is not an emergency dispatcher.
Social media makes it easy to post first and think later. But words on a screen can have serious legal consequences well beyond the comments section. Whether you’re typing an angry reply or receiving one, the distinction matters: an online argument is one thing; a criminal offense is another.
