18 U.S.C. § 2102
Definitions
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 20
cases (7 in the last 5 years), 1968–2024 · leading case: United States v. Michael Miselis, 972 F.3d 518 (4th Cir. 2020).
United States v. Michael Miselis, 972 F.3d 518 (4th Cir. 2020). “§ 2101 (a)(2), as well as speech “urging” others to riot or “involving” mere advocacy of violence under 18 U.S.C. § 2102 (b). In all other respects, however, the statute comports with the First Amendment.”
United States v. Daley, 378 F. Supp. 3d 539 (W.D. Va. 2019). “*548 Certain terms employed in § 2101 are further defined in 18 U.S.C. § 2102 . Section 2102(a) defines "riot" as: [A] public disturbance involving (1) an act or acts of violence by one or more persons part of an assemblage of three or more persons, which act or acts shall…”
United States v. Robert Rundo, 990 F.3d 709 (9th Cir. 2021). “§ 2101 (a), except insofar as subparagraph (2) prohibits speech tending to “organize,” “promote,” or “encourage” a riot, and 18 U.S.C. § 2102 (b) expands the prohibition to “urging” a riot and to mere ** This summary constitutes no part of the opinion of the court.”
United States v. David T. Dellinger, 472 F.2d 340 (7th Cir. 1973). “The crucial subsection here, however, which did not follow the suggestion of the Attorney General, is 18 U.S.C. § 2102 (b), reading as follows: “(b) As used in this chapter, the term ‘to incite a riot’, or ‘to organize, promote, encourage,'participate in, or carry on a riot’,…”
Nat'l Mobilization Comm. to End the War in Viet Nam v. Thomas A. Foran, 411 F.2d 934 (7th Cir. 1969). “Given a normal and natural construction, much less a narrow interpretation, it is our conclusion that the Riot provisions are not such an encroachment on free speech nor so vague and indefinite as to present a substantial constitutional question.”
United States v. Shamar Betts, 99 F.4th 1048 (7th Cir. 2024). “18 U.S.C. § 2102 (a). The Act further provides: (b) As used in this chapter, the term “to incite a riot”, or “to organize, promote, encourage, par- ticipate in, or carry on a riot”, includes, but is not limited to, urging or instigating other per- sons to riot, but shall not be…”
In Re Shead, 302 F. Supp. 560 (N.D. Cal. 1969). “This intent must be to promote, and the overt acts must be committed for the purpose of promoting, the disturbances defined in 18 U.S.C. § 2102 (a), which provides in summary form: As used in this chapter, the term “riot” means a public disturbance involving : 1) acts of…”
United States v. Victor Edwards, 65 F.4th 996 (8th Cir. 2023). “See 18 U.S.C. § 2102 (a). Setting fire to a building falls safely within the type of conduct prohibited by the statute.”
Providence Washington Ins. Co. v. James T. Lynn, in His Capacity as the Sec'y of Hous. & Urban Dev., 492 F.2d 979 (1st Cir. 1974). “” 18 U.S.C. § 2102 (a). Although plaintiff makes a respectable argument that these laws and HUD’s definition of riot or civil disorder contained in paragraph (C) of the reinsurance contract are inconsistent, we agree neither that any substantial inconsistency can be found, nor,…”
Douglas v. Pitcher, 319 F. Supp. 706 (E.D. La. 1970). “A comparison between this section and the corresponding section of the federal act, 18 U.S.C.A. § 2102 , reveals that the state act does not include the specific protective language found in the federal act.”
United States v. Markiewicz, 978 F.3d 786 (2d Cir. 1992). “18 U.S.C. § 2102 (a). Three gatherings of Oneidas during a period of one week are cited by *815 the government as fitting this definition of a riot, and we agree.”
Nat'l Mobilization Com. to End War in Viet Nam v. Foran, 297 F. Supp. 1 (N.D. Ill. 1968). “18 U.S.C. § 2102 (b). It is concerned solely with the use of interstate facilities by persons who intend to encourage or participate in acts of violence which pose a clear and present danger to persons and property.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.