1.145 — THREATENING ELECTED OFFICIALS OR THEIR IMMEDIATE FAMILY

Violations of "Statute 1.145" results in a Class B Felony

---

(a) Definitions

Threatening an elected official or their immediate family refers to any verbal, written, electronic, or physical action that communicates an intent to cause bodily harm, death, or significant harassment to an individual holding public office or to their spouse, child, sibling, or parent.

Covered individuals under this statute include:

• Mayors, council members, commissioners, governors, or any individual elected to a governmental role

• Candidates actively campaigning for public office

• Immediate family members, including spouses, domestic partners, children (biological, adopted, or step), parents, and siblings

A threat may be:

• Direct or implied

• Expressed through speech, messages, gestures, or physical presence

• Delivered in person, over the phone, via mail, electronically (email, text, social media), or by third parties acting on behalf of the individual

The threat must be credible, cause fear, or be reasonably interpreted as a serious expression of intent to harm.

(b) Elements

To establish the offense of threatening an elected official or their immediate family, the prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that:

• The defendant made a threat against an elected official or a member of their immediate family

• The threat contained language, behavior, or intent that could reasonably be interpreted as a credible plan or desire to cause harm, intimidation, or fear

• The defendant knew or reasonably should have known the person targeted held public office or was a close family member of someone who did

• The threat was intentional and not part of a joke, exaggeration, or constitutionally protected speech under free expression laws

The presence of fear, intimidation, or disruption of official duties further strengthens the offense.

(c) Defenses

Legal defenses to this charge may include:

• Lack of intent: The communication was made without serious intent to harm and was taken out of context.

• Protected speech: The statement was made under the protection of lawful free speech, such as criticism or protest, without threatening content.

• Mistaken identity: The defendant did not know the individual was an elected official or was misidentified as the source of the threat.

• No credible threat: The language or behavior in question was vague, unserious, or lacked any indication of real danger or follow-through.

The burden remains on the defense to show that the act or message lacked criminal intent or context.

(d) Aggravating Factors

Aggravating circumstances that may increase the severity of the offense or justify harsher penalties include:

• The threat was repeated, coordinated, or part of an ongoing pattern of harassment

• Weapons were referenced, displayed, or brandished in connection to the threat

• The threat resulted in disruption of public proceedings, evacuations, or security responses

• The defendant has prior convictions for harassment, stalking, or violent threats

• The threat was made during a public event, speech, or official duty, increasing the risk to the public or governmental process