18 U.S.C. § 250
Penalties for civil rights offenses involving sexual misconduct
Section not effective until Oct. 1 of the first fiscal year beginning after
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5
cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1934–2025 · leading case: United States v. Nardello
United States v. Nardello (1969)
“For example, 18 U. S. C. §250 (1940 ed.) was entitled “Extortion by informer”; today substantially the same provision is captioned “Blackmail.”
Bratton v. United States (1934)
“-00 as a consideration for concealing the offense, the District Attorney advises us that the indictment was returned under section 146 (18 USCA § 251), and points out that this must be true because the sentence imposed exceeds the limit imposed by section 145 (18 USCA § 250); it…”
Long v. United States (1943)
“Tolbert, and others, entered into a conspiracy to violate sections 250 and 251, Title 18, and sections 2803, 2810, 2831, 2833, 2834, and 2913, Title 26 United States Code, 18 U.S.C.A. §§ 250 , 251, 26 U.S.C.A. §§ 2803 , 2810, 2831, 2833, 2834, 2913; and the several subsequent…”
CANTRELL v. BRUNSWICK MAINE POLICE (2024)
“§ 242 (deprivation of rights under color of law); and 18 U.S.C. § 250 (penalties for civil rights offenses involving sexual misconduct).”
Cobb v. Mohave, County of (2025)
“1 at 1); 1 “Claim 2: Improper investigation of case that violated Constitutional, civil, and 2 victims’ rights” pursuant to “18 U.S.C. § 250 . . . 18 U.S.C. § 242 [and] 18 U.”
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.