U.S. Code » Title 18 » Part PART I— CRIMES › Chapter CHAPTER 115— TREASON, SEDITION, AND SUBVERSIVE ACTIVITIES

18 U.S.C. § 2390

Enlistment to serve against United States

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 18 CasesGoogle Scholar

Whoever enlists or is engaged within the United States or in any place subject to the jurisdiction thereof, with intent to serve in armed hostility against the United States, shall be fined under this title 11 See 1994 Amendment note below. or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9 cases, 1999–2019 · leading case: Holloway v. United States
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Holloway v. United States (1999) scotus · cites it 2× “Or consider 18 U. S. C. § 2390 , which makes it a crime to enlist within the United States "with intent to serve in armed hostility against the United States.”
United States v. Khan (2006) ca4 · cites it 6× “In this case, Count One entailed a conspiracy to violate 18 U.S.C. § 2390 by enlisting to serve in armed hostility against the United States, while Count Eleven involved a violation of 18 U.”
United States v. Khan (2004) vaed · cites it 2× “§ 960 , the Neutrality Act; 2) violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2390 , enlistment to serve against the United States, 3) violation of 18 U.”
Padilla v. Hanft (2005) scd “§ 2383 (rebellion or insurrection); § 2384 (seditious conspiracy); 18 U.S.C. § 2390 (enlistment to serve in armed hostility against the United States); 31 CFR § 595.”
United States v. Abu Khatallah (2015) dcd “§ 960; and enlisting “to serve in armed hostility against the United States,” 18 U.S.C. § 2390 . The Court therefore declines to demand clear statements of extraterritorial application in this case — essentially, to render Bowman toothless — merely because some criminal statutes…”
United States v. Al-Imam (2019) cadc “§ 960 ; and enlisting "to serve in armed hostility against the United States," 18 U.S.C. § 2390 . The Court therefore declines to demand clear statements of extraterritorial application in this case-essentially, to render Bowman toothless-merely because some criminal statutes…”
Hedges v. Obama (2012) nysd “§ 2384 (seditious conspiracy); 18 U.S.C. § 2390 (enlistment to serve in armed hostility against the United States); and 50 U.”
Royer v. Wilson (2014) vaed · cites it 2× “Fourteen of those counts charged Royer with: various conspiracies, including a conspiracy to violate the Neutrality Act, to engage in armed hostility against the United States under 18 U.S.C. § 2390 , and to contribute material support to the Taliban, al Qaeda, and LET; multiple…”
United States v. Al-Imam (2019) dcd “§ 960 ; and enlisting “to serve in armed hostility against the United States,” 18 U.S.C. § 2390 . The Court therefore declines to demand clear statements of extraterritorial application in this case—essentially, to render Bowman toothless—merely because some criminal statutes…”
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.