For those debating whether or not these tweets constitute an actual threat there is a related case before the Supreme Court, Elonis v. United States [1]. It was

For those debating whether or not these tweets constitute an actual threat there is a related case before the Supreme Court, Elonis v. United States [1]. It was argued back in December but because this will be major precedent I doubt we'll see an opinion until SCOTUS Season in June. The case seems to hinge on "subjective intent to harm" and will be the first major case (that I'm aware of) that will deal with speech like this on social media. Elonis is different (petitioner was convicted for making threats against his ex-wfe) from this thing with Schilling, but the context of the case is the same here - and the justices are quick to acknowledge that conviction standards are pretty strict in defining what constitutes a "true threat" and what a "reasonable person" would construe as a threat. Justice Breyer gets particularly snarky during oral argument. From the ScotusBlog summary: Issue: (1) Whether, consistent with the First Amendment and Virginia v. Black, conviction of threatening another person under 18 U.S.C. § 875(c) requires proof of the defendant's subjective intent to threaten, as required by the Ninth Circuit and the supreme courts of Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Vermont; or whether it is enough to show that a “reasonable person” would regard the statement as threatening, as held by other federal courts of appeals and state courts of last resort; and (2) whether, as a matter of statutory interpretation, conviction of threatening another person under 18 U.S.C. § 875(c) requires proof of the defendant's subjective intent to threaten. [1] http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/elonis-v-united-states/ http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/elonis-v-united-s...