U.S. Code » Title 18 » Part PART I— CRIMES › Chapter CHAPTER 3— ANIMALS, BIRDS, FISH, AND PLANTS

18 U.S.C. § 43

Force, violence, and threats involving animal enterprises

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 18 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a)Offense.—Whoever travels in interstate or foreign commerce, or uses or causes to be used the mail or any facility of interstate or foreign commerce—(1) for the purpose of damaging or interfering with the operations of an animal enterprise; and(2) in connection with such purpose—(A) intentionally damages or causes the loss of any real or personal property (including animals or records) used by an animal enterprise, or any real or personal property of a person or entity having a connection to, relationship with, or transactions with an animal enterprise;(B) intentionally places a person in reasonable fear of the death of, or serious bodily injury to that person, a member of the immediate family (as defined in section 115) of that person, or a spouse or intimate partner of that person by a course of conduct involving threats, acts of vandalism, property damage, criminal trespass, harassment, or intimidation; or(C) conspires or attempts to do so;shall be punished as provided for in subsection (b).(b)Penalties.—The punishment for a violation of section 11 So in original. Probably should be “subsection”. (a) or an attempt or conspiracy to violate subsection (a) shall be—(1) a fine under this title or imprisonment not 22 So in original. Probably should be preceded by “for”. more than 1 year, or both, if the offense does not instill in another the reasonable fear of serious bodily injury or death and—(A) the offense results in no economic damage or bodily injury; or(B) the offense results in economic damage that does not exceed $10,000;(2) a fine under this title or imprisonment for not more than 5 years, or both, if no bodily injury occurs and—(A) the offense results in economic damage exceeding $10,000 but not exceeding $100,000; or(B) the offense instills in another the reasonable fear of serious bodily injury or death;(3) a fine under this title or imprisonment for not more than 10 years, or both, if—(A) the offense results in economic damage exceeding $100,000; or(B) the offense results in substantial bodily injury to another individual;(4) a fine under this title or imprisonment for not more than 20 years, or both, if—(A) the offense results in serious bodily injury to another individual; or(B) the offense results in economic damage exceeding $1,000,000; and(5) imprisonment for life or for any terms of years, a fine under this title, or both, if the offense results in death of another individual.(c)Restitution.—An order of restitution under section 3663 or 3663A of this title with respect to a violation of this section may also include restitution—(1) for the reasonable cost of repeating any experimentation that was interrupted or invalidated as a result of the offense;(2) for the loss of food production or farm income reasonably attributable to the offense; and(3) for any other economic damage, including any losses or costs caused by economic disruption, resulting from the offense.(d)Definitions.—As used in this section—(1) the term “animal enterprise” means—(A) a commercial or academic enterprise that uses or sells animals or animal products for profit, food or fiber production, agriculture, education, research, or testing;(B) a zoo, aquarium, animal shelter, pet store, breeder, furrier, circus, or rodeo, or other lawful competitive animal event; or(C) any fair or similar event intended to advance agricultural arts and sciences;(2) the term “course of conduct” means a pattern of conduct composed of 2 or more acts, evidencing a continuity of purpose;(3) the term “economic damage”—(A) means the replacement costs of lost or damaged property or records, the costs of repeating an interrupted or invalidated experiment, the loss of profits, or increased costs, including losses and increased costs resulting from threats, acts or vandalism, property damage, trespass, harassment, or intimidation taken against a person or entity on account of that person’s or entity’s connection to, relationship with, or transactions with the animal enterprise; but(B) does not include any lawful economic disruption (including a lawful boycott) that results from lawful public, governmental, or business reaction to the disclosure of information about an animal enterprise;(4) the term “serious bodily injury” means—(A) injury posing a substantial risk of death;(B) extreme physical pain;(C) protracted and obvious disfigurement; or(D) protracted loss or impairment of the function of a bodily member, organ, or mental faculty; and(5) the term “substantial bodily injury” means—(A) deep cuts and serious burns or abrasions;(B) short-term or nonobvious disfigurement;(C) fractured or dislocated bones, or torn members of the body;(D) significant physical pain;(E) illness;(F) short-term loss or impairment of the function of a bodily member, organ, or mental faculty; or(G) any other significant injury to the body.(e)Rules of Construction.—Nothing in this section shall be construed—(1) to prohibit any expressive conduct (including peaceful picketing or other peaceful demonstration) protected from legal prohibition by the First Amendment to the Constitution;(2) to create new remedies for interference with activities protected by the free speech or free exercise clauses of the First Amendment to the Constitution, regardless of the point of view expressed, or to limit any existing legal remedies for such interference; or(3) to provide exclusive criminal penalties or civil remedies with respect to the conduct prohibited by this action, or to preempt State or local laws that may provide such penalties or remedies.(Added Pub. L. 102–346, § 2(a), Aug. 26, 1992, 106 Stat. 928; amended Pub. L. 104–294, title VI, § 601(r)(3), Oct. 11, 1996, 110 Stat. 3502; Pub. L. 107–188, title III, § 336, June 12, 2002, 116 Stat. 681; Pub. L. 109–374, § 2(a), Nov. 27, 2006, 120 Stat. 2652.)Editorial NotesPrior Provisions

A prior section 43, acts June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 687; Sept. 2, 1960, Pub. L. 86–702, § 2, 74 Stat. 754; Dec. 5, 1969, Pub. L. 91–135, § 7(a), 83 Stat. 279, related to transportation of wildlife taken in violation of State, national, or foreign law, the receipt of such wildlife, and the making of false records in relation thereto, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 97–79, § 9(b)(2), Nov. 16, 1981, 95 Stat. 1079. See section 3372(a) of Title 16, Conservation.

Amendments

2006—Pub. L. 109–374 amended section catchline and text generally, substituting provisions relating to force, violence, and threats involving animal enterprises for provisions relating to animal enterprise terrorism.

2002—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 107–188, § 336(a), amended heading and text of subsec. (a) generally, deleting par. (2) reference to intentionally stealing and to requirement that economic damage exceed $10,000, and in concluding provisions substituting reference to punishment under subsec. (b) for reference to fine or imprisonment of not more than one year.

Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 107–188, § 336(b), amended subsec. (b) generally, substituting “Penalties” for “Aggravated Offense” in heading and list of penalties for property damage, personal injury and death for reference to serious bodily injury and death in text.

Subsec. (c)(3). Pub. L. 107–188, § 336(c), added par. (3).

1996—Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 104–294 inserted “or 3663A” after “section 3663” in introductory provisions.

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesShort Title

Pub. L. 102–346, § 1, Aug. 26, 1992, 106 Stat. 928, provided that: “This Act [enacting this section and provisions set out below] may be cited as the ‘Animal Enterprise Protection Act of 1992’.”

Study of Effect of Terrorism on Certain Animal Enterprises

Pub. L. 102–346, § 3, Aug. 26, 1992, 106 Stat. 929, directed Attorney General and Secretary of Agriculture to jointly conduct a study on extent and effects of domestic and international terrorism on enterprises using animals for food or fiber production, agriculture, research, or testing, and, not later than 1 year after Aug. 26, 1992, submit a report that describes the results of the study together with any appropriate recommendations and legislation to Congress.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 58 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1956–2026 · leading case: United States v. Fullmer, 584 F.3d 132 (3rd Cir. 2009).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
United States v. Fullmer, 584 F.3d 132 (3rd Cir. 2009). · cites it 26× “OPINION OF THE COURT FUENTES, Circuit Judge: Defendants Darius Fullmer, Andrew Stepanian, Kevin Kjonaas, Joshua Harper, Lauren Gazzola, Jacob Conroy, and Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty ("SHAC") collectively challenge their convictions for conspiracy to violate the Animal…”
Blum v. Holder, 744 F.3d 790 (1st Cir. 2014). · cites it 11× “Although they have never been prosecuted or threatened with prosecution under the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act (“AETA” or “Act”), 18 U.S.C. § 43 , which criminalizes “force, violence, and threats involving animal enterprises,” they sued to obtain declaratory and injunctive…”
United States v. Tyler Lang, 875 F.3d 360 (7th Cir. 2017). · cites it 10× “Johnson and Lang were ultimately charged in federal court with violating the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act (AETA), 18 U.S.C. § 43 (a)(2)(A) and (a)(2)(C). They moved to dismiss the indictment, arguing that: (1) AETA is unconstitutionally overbroad because, by prohibiting…”
United States Ass'n of Reptile Keepers, Inc. v. Zinke, 852 F.3d 1131 (D.C. Cir. 2017). · cites it 3× “(emphasis added) (codified as amended at 18 U.S.C. § 43 , now codified as further amended at 16 U.”
United States v. Ricky Bryant, 716 F.2d 1091 (6th Cir. 1983). · cites it 3× “1979), involving a prosecution pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 43 (a)(2). The defendant in Molt was charged with conspiring to smuggle reptiles into the United States.”
United States v. Servando Alvarado-Casas, 715 F.3d 945 (5th Cir. 2013). “See 18 U.S.C. § 43 (b)(3)-(4); 18 U.S.C. § 115 (b)(1)(B)(iii)—(iv); 18 U.”
United States v. Steve Navarro-Vargas, United States of Am. v. Jose Antonio Leon-Jasso, 408 F.3d 1184 (9th Cir. 2005). “§ 1821 ; disruption of zoos, circuses, and rodeos, 18 U.S.C. § 43 ; or parking violations committed on federal lands, 36 C.”
United States v. Sharpnack, 355 U.S. 286 (1958). · cites it 2× “And see 18 U. S. C. § 43 . The Johnson Act, 64 Stat.”
United States v. Franklin Brown, 726 F.3d 993 (7th Cir. 2013). “10(A), which distinguishes buyer-seller relationships from conspiracies.”
United States v. Edwin David Wood, II, 364 F.3d 704 (6th Cir. 2004). “The Brennan court cited the following code sections: 18 U.S.C. §§ 43 (a)(1) (animal enterprise terrorism); 514(a)(3) (false or fictitious instruments or obligations); 844(e) (threats or false statements concerning explosive materials); 1461 (obscene or crime-inciting matter);…”
United States v. Martinez-Cruz, 836 F.3d 1305 (10th Cir. 2016). “§ 77 ), "conspiracy to damage or interfere with the operations of an animal enterprise by property damage” ( 18 U.S.C. § 43 (a)(2)(A)), "con *1312 spiracy to violate provisions regulating helium gas,” (50 U.”
United States v. Papagno, 639 F.3d 1093 (D.C. Cir. 2011). “See 18 U.S.C. § 43 (c) (damaging or interfering with an enterprise involving animals); 18 U.”
Show all 58 citing cases →
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.