4 ms·
Conspiracy requires more than speech. Two accountants who agree over drinks that "the shareholders are assholes, we should defraud them!" are not commiting a cr
by marcusverus 7y ago
Conspiracy requires more than speech. Two accountants who agree over drinks that "the shareholders are assholes, we should defraud them!" are not commiting a crime until they take some action past speech alone. Based on a quick Google search of the legal elements of conspiracy crimes, you need an actual agreement/plan to commit a crime and some consummating act that shows intent to follow through.
Point being, these aren't really speech restrictions.
- SamReidHughes 7y agoApparently not, see U.S. v. Shabini, so an overt act requirement isn't a consequence of the 1st Amendment rule; just many laws (but not all) happen to require one. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Shabani https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Shabani