School Threat Federal Charges Defense Lawyers

Last Updated on: 26th November 2025, 06:15 pm

School Threat Federal Charges Defense Lawyers

Your receiving a call you never expected. The school principal is on the line, and their saying federal investigators want to speak with your child. Or worse—the FBI is at you’re door, asking about a social media post. Your teenager swears it was just a joke, something stupid they posted online. But now there talking about federal charges. Federal prison. A permanent criminal record.

If your facing this situation, you need to understand something crucial: school threat cases have changed dramatically over the passed few years. What might of seemed like a harmless post, a moment of frustration, or typical teenage hyperbole online can now trigger a full federal investigation. The stakes are higher then most parents realize, and the window for protecting you’re child’s future is alot shorter than you think.

This isn’t the kind of thing where you wait and see what happens. Federal prosecutors don’t mess around with school threat cases—irregardless of weather your child “meant it” or not. The decisions you make in the next 72 hours, the things you say (or don’t say) to investigators, and weather you hire the right kind of attorney can litterally determine if your child faces federal prison or if the charges get resolved before their even filed.

What Makes a School Threat FEDERAL? (And Why That Matters)

Look, here’s the thing most people don’t get. They think: “My kid goes to school here, the school is here, we live here—why is the FBI involved?” Its a reasonable question. But the answer is going to surprise you, and it explains why so many of these cases end up in federal court rather then state court.

The Interstate Commerce Trap

Any threat that crosses state lines falls under federal jurisdiction. And here’s the kicker—virtually every social media post automatically crosses state lines. I mean, seriously. Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat, Twitter, Discord, Xbox Live chat—all of these platforms operate across the entire country (and world). The servers are in different states. The company headquarters are in different states. Other users are in different states.

So even if your child posted something while sitting in there bedroom in Brooklyn, and the school there threatening is three blocks away, the moment that post went onto a social media platform, it became an interstate communication. And that triggers federal jurisdiction under 18 U.S.C. § 875(c).

I’ve saw this trap catch so many families off gaurd. They think its a local issue. Then the FBI shows up, and they realize: this ain’t going away.

When Local Police Call the Feds

Heres how it typically works. Someone—a student, parent, teacher, or even an automated monitoring system—reports a threatening post. The school resource officer (usually local police) gets involved first. But the second they see it was posted online, they call the FBI. Why? Because they know its federal jurisdiction, and they don’t want the liability of handling it wrong.

The FBI has Joint Terrorism Task Forces in every major city. Yes, terrorism task forces. Schools threats are treated that seriously now, especially after the shootings we’ve seen across the country. These task forces coordinate with local law enforcement, but make no mistake—once the FBI is involved, your dealing with federal charges, federal prosecutors, and federal courts.

Compare that to a threat made in-person at school (like, a student says something verbally in the cafeteria). That might stay at the state level, prosecuted by you’re local District Attorney. The penalties can still be serious, but state courts generally have more flexibility, better diversion programs for juveniles, and frankly, less harsh sentencing.

Federal vs. State: Why It Matters Enormously

Federal charges are a diffrent beast entirely. Here’s why:

• Prosecutors: Your not dealing with your local DA’s office. Your dealing with the United States Attorney’s Office. They have way more resources, higher conviction rates, and they don’t have to worry about local politics or community pressure. There gonna be tougher to negotiate with.
• Courts: Federal court is more formal, more rigid. Federal judges follow federal sentencing guidelines, which are complex and often harsh. There’s less room for the kind of individual discretion you might see in state court.
• Penalties: Federal sentencing guidelines are no joke. Even a first offense can result in significant prison time if the threat was specific enough. And federal prison—not county jail—is where people go.
• Consequences: A federal conviction carries collateral consequences that many people don’t realize until its to late. More on that later, but suffice it to say: federal convictions can destroy opportunities in ways state convictions don’t always do.

Bottom line? If you’re dealing with federal charges based off an online post, you need a lawyer who knows federal criminal defense. Your family lawyer, even if there great at there job, probably isn’t equipped for this unless they regularly practice in federal court.

The Federal Laws Your Actually Facing

Okay, so what exactly are we talking about here? What laws apply, and what do prosecutors have to prove? This is where it gets real. Federal threat charges aren’t vague—their based on specific statutes with specific elements. Understanding these laws is the first step in building a defense.

18 U.S.C. § 875(c): Interstate Communications Threats

This is the big one. This is the statute that gets used in probly 90% of school threat cases involving social media. Here’s what it says (paraphrasing): its a federal crime to transmit any communication in interstate commerce containing a threat to injure another person.

To convict someone under this statute, the prosecution has to prove three elements:

1. Interstate communication: The threat was communicated across state lines (again, social media automatically satisfies this)
2. Threat to injure: The communication contained a threat to kidnap or injure someone
3. Intent/knowledge: The defendant had the intent or knowledge that the communication would be viewed as a threat (more on this below—its changed recently)

The penalty? Up to five years in federal prison. And thats just for a first offense. If there are enhancements (which we’ll get to), it can be even worse.

Now, you might be thinking: “But my kid didn’t actualy intend to hurt anyone. It was just a joke.” That defense use to be alot harder to make. But in 2023, the Supreme Court changed the game.

Counterman v. Colorado: A Game-Changer for Defense

In June 2023, the Supreme Court decided Counterman v. Colorado, and it made defending these cases significantly easier (at least in theory). Before Counterman, prosecutors only had to prove that a “reasonable person” would perceive the statement as a threat. The defendant’s actual state of mind—weather they ment it or not—wasn’t always relevent.

Counterman changed that. Now, the prosecution has to prove the defendant had a subjective awareness that their statement would be understood as a threat. In other words, prosecutors have to show the defendant knew or should have known that there words would be taken seriously as a threat.

This is huge for defendants, particularly young people who post impulsively, use hyperbole, or are immersed in online cultures (like gaming communities) where exagerated, violent language is the norm but never ment literally.

For example: A 16-year-old posts on Discord after loosing a video game, “I’m gonna shoot up my school tomorrow.” In context, this might be viewed as typical (if stupid) trash talk. The question now isn’t just “would a reasonable person see that as a threat?” Its also “did this 16-year-old genuinely understand that people would take it seriously?” Evidence of there immaturity, the context of the platform, there history of similar statements never acted upon—all of that becomes critical.

Any attorney defending a school threat case in 2025 needs to be using Counterman aggresively. If there not talking about it in you’re initial consultation, that’s a red flag.

18 U.S.C. § 1038: False Information and Hoaxes (Swatting)

Here’s where things get significantl worse. If the threat led to an emergency response—a school lockdown, police or SWAT deployment, evacuation—prosecutors may charge under § 1038 instead of (or in addition to) § 875.

This statute makes it a crime to convey false information about an explosive, fire, or other danger, knowing the information is false, with the intent to cause an emergency response. The penalties are steeper: up to five years for a basic violation, and up to 20 years if someone is seriously injured as a result.

But wait, there’s more (and its not good). If the threat caused an actual emergency response, the defendant can be ordered to pay restitution for the costs. And we’re not talking about a few hundred bucks. School districts and law enforcement agencies calculate:

• Officer overtime
• SWAT team deployment costs
• School closure and staffing disruptions
• Counseling services for students
• Investigation expenses

These costs can easilly reach $50,000 to $100,000. I’ve seen cases where restitution exceeded $500,000. And restitution isn’t dischargeable in bankruptcy—you’re stuck with it. For a teenager, this debt can follow them for decades.

18 U.S.C. § 115: Threats Against Federal Officials or Facilities

If the school recieved federal funding (most public schools do), or if the threat mentioned any federal employees or officials, prosecutors might pile on § 115 charges. This statute prohibits threats to assault, kidnap, or murder federal officials, employess, or their family members.

This doesn’t come up in every case, but when it does, it carries enhanced penalties and can make negotiation alot harder.

What Evidence Do Prosecutors Use?

People always ask: “What kind of evidence do they actually have?” In a school threat case, the evidence usually includes:

• The communication itself: Screenshots, saved messages, posts. Even if you’re child deleted it, someone likely captured it, and the platform itself probaly retained it on there servers.
• Witness statements: Other students, teachers, administrators who saw the post or heard about it.
• Digital forensics: If devices were seized, the FBI will extract everything—texts, search history, location data, app usage. They can recover “deleted” content. They can see what your child was looking at before and after the post.
• School records: Statements your child made to school administrators. Disciplinary history. Prior incidents.
• Mental health records: If your child was recieving counseling or treatment, those records might be subpoenaed (with limitations, but it happens).

The prosecution’s job is to show: (1) the communication was made, (2) it was a threat, and (3) the defendant knew it would be percieved as a threat. If they can prove all three beyond a reasonable doubt, your looking at a conviction.

What Happens in a Federal School Threat Investigation

So the threat has been reported. What happens next? Understanding the investigation process is critical because this is the phase where you have the most oportunity to influence the outcome—before charges are even filed.

The First 72 Hours: A Critical Window

Here’s something most people don’t realize: there’s usually a 72-hour window (sometimes more, sometimes less) between when the FBI opens an investigation and when the U.S. Attorney’s Office decides weather to file charges. What happens in this window can litterally determine if your child ends up with a federal indictment or if the case gets resolved administratively (or not charged at all).

During this period, investigators are:

• Interviewing witnesses (classmates, teachers)
• Trying to interview the suspect (your child)
• Seeking consent to search devices
• Analyzing the threat for specificity and credibility
• Assessing whether the suspect had means or intent to carry it out

If you hire an attorney immediately—and I mean within hours of learning about the investigation—that attorney can sometimes intervene before charges are filed. They can:

• Communicate with the U.S. Attorney’s Office on your behalf
• Provide context and mitigating information
• Negotiate for the case to be handled at the state level (if possible)
• Argue that no charges should be filed at all

But if you wait? If you let your child be interviewed without a lawyer? If you consent to searches thinking “we have nothing to hide”? You’ve probaly just made it significantly easier for prosecutors to charge your child.

The FBI Interview Trap

FBI agents are very, very good at what they do. There trained to be friendly, non-threatening, and to make you feel like cooperating is the best option. They might say things like:

• “We just want to hear your side of the story.”
• “This will go easier if you cooperate.”
• “We’re trying to clear this up quickly so your son can move on.”

Don’t fall for it. I’m not saying FBI agents are dishonest—but there job is to investigate crimes, and anything you or your child says can (and will) be used against you. Agents are allowed to lie to you during interviews. They can misrepresent evidence. They can suggest leniency they have no authority to offer.

If agents want to interview your child and your child is under 18, you have the right to be present. But even with you there, your child should not be answering questions without an attorney present. Period. Even if there “innocent,” even if “theres nothing to hide.” Innocent people go to prison all the time because they talked to investigators and said something that got twisted.

The correct response: “We’d like to cooperate, but we need to speak with an attorney first.” Then actually call an attorney. Don’t wait.

Device Seizures and Searches

Investigators are gonna want access to your child’s phone, computer, gaming console, tablet—anything they might have used to communicate. They’ll ask for consent to search. They might say it’ll “speed things up” or “help clear your child.”

Here’s the reality: do not consent to a search. Make them get a warrant. Why?

1. It buys time. Getting a warrant takes time, during which your attorney can be preparing and advising you.
2. Warrants have limits. A warrant specifies what can be searched. Consent is open-ended.
3. Consent makes evidence easier to use. If you consent, you’ve waived a bunch of potential defenses related to the search.

Now, if agents have probable cause, they’ll get the warrant anyway. But that’s fine—you haven’t made there job easier, and you’ve preserved your rights.

One more thing: if devices are seized, assume everything on them will be recovered. “Deleted” messages, browsing history, app data—federal forensics can retrieve almost anything. So if your child deleted the post thinking that would make it go away, it didn’t. It’s still there, and now theres also the fact that they tried to delete it, which can be used against them.

The School’s Separate Investigation (and Why Its Dangerous)

While the FBI is investigating criminally, the school is conducting its own disciplinary investigation. These are seperate processes, but here’s the problem: statements made during a school investigation can be used in the criminal case.

Schools often require students to participate in disciplinary hearings. They might threaten expulsion if the student doesn’t cooperate. Parents think, “Okay, we’ll deal with the school part, and the criminal part is seperate.”

Wrong. Anything your child says to school administrators—principals, resource officers, counselors—can be handed over to the FBI. Your child has no Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination in a school disciplinary hearing. The school isn’t a government actor in that context (even though its a public school), so constitutional protections don’t apply the same way.

So what do you do? You have an attorney send a letter to the school stating that your child will not participate in any interviews or hearings related to the alleged threat until the criminal investigation is resolved. Yes, the school might suspend or expel your child in the meantime. That sucks. But its better than your child making admissions that land them in federal prison.

You can challenge the school’s disciplinary action later (possibly with an education lawyer), but the priority right now is the criminal case. A suspension can be appealed. A federal conviction cannot.

Federal Charges for Juveniles vs. Adults

One of the first questions parents ask is: “Is my child going to federal prison?” The answer depends heavily on there age at the time of the offense. Federal law treats juveniles very differently from adults—but only if the defendant is actually prosecuted as a juvenile.

The Federal Juvenile Delinquency Act

If your child is under 18 at the time of the offense, they might be prosecuted under the Federal Juvenile Delinquency Act (18 U.S.C. §§ 5031-5042). This is a much, much better outcome then being charged as an adult. Here’s why:

• Different facilities: Juveniles are held in federal juvenile facilities, not adult federal prisons.
• Shorter “sentences”: Federal juvenile dispositions typically can’t extend beyond the juvenile’s 21st birthday (with some exceptions). So even a “serious” offense might result in a few years of supervision, not decades.
• Possible record sealing: Federal juvenile records can sometimes be sealed or expunged, meaning they won’t haunt your child forever. Adult federal convictions are permanent.
• Different legal standards: The focus is more on rehabilitation then punishment (at least in theory).

But heres the catch: federal prosecutors have discretion to charge juveniles as adults in certain circumstances. They look at factors like:

• The seriousness of the offense (a detailed plan with specific targets is worse then a vague threat)
• The defendant’s criminal history (prior arrests, even if not convictions)
• The defendant’s age and maturity (a 17-year-old is more likely to be charged as an adult then a 14-year-old)
• Public safety concerns

If prosecutors decide to “certify” your child as an adult, all the protections of the juvenile system evaporate. Your child is now facing adult charges, adult sentencing guidelines, and adult federal prison. This is one of the most critical fights in the early stages of a case.

The 18th Birthday Line

If your child is 18 or older at the time of the offense, there not eligible for the federal juvenile system. Period. They’re treated as adults, with all the harsh consequences that entails.

This is a brutal line. A 17-year-old who makes a threat might get supervision and treatment. An 18-year-old who makes the exact same threat is looking at federal prison. The difference of a single day can change everything.

And just to be clear: its the age at the time of the offense that matters, not the age at the time of arrest or trial. So if your child made a threat at 17 but wasn’t arrested until they turned 18, they should still be eligible for juvenile treatment (though prosecutors will sometimes argue otherwise).

Young Adult Defendants (18-21)

Even if your child is technically an adult (18 or older), federal courts sometimes consider “youthful offender” provisions that can result in more lenient sentencing. This isn’t a seperate system like the juvenile system—it’s still adult court—but judges have some discretion to consider age and immaturity as mitigating factors.

That said, don’t count on it. The federal sentencing guidelines are pretty rigid, and many judges feel constrained by them. A good attorney will argue for downward departures based on age, but theres no guarentee it’ll work.

Federal Sentencing and the Real Penalties You’re Looking At

Alright, lets talk about what actually happens if your child is convicted. What are we really looking at here? Because “up to five years” is the statutory maximum, but what do people actually get sentenced to?

This is where federal sentencing guidelines come into play, and—trust me—there complicated. But I’ll try to break it down in a way that makes sense.

How Federal Sentencing Guidelines Work

Federal judges don’t just pull sentences out of thin air. They use the United States Sentencing Guidelines, which are basically a huge manual that calculates a sentencing range based on:

1. The offense level: Each crime has a “base offense level.” For threats under 18 U.S.C. § 875(c), the base level is typically 12. But then you add enhancements.
2. Enhancements: These are increases based on specific facts of the case, like:
   • Did the threat mention a specific weapon? (Add 2 levels)
   • Was the threat made with intent to carry it out? (Add levels)
   • Did the threat cause substantial disruption (like a school evacuation)? (Add levels)
   • Were multiple people threatened? (Add levels)
3. Criminal history category: Ranges from I (no prior record) to VI (extensive record). Most first-time offenders are Category I.

Once you calculate the offense level and the criminal history category, you look at a chart that gives you a sentencing range (in months). The judge then sentences within that range (or justifies a departure from it).

Typical Sentences for School Threat Cases

So what does this look like in practice? It varies widely based on the specifics, but heres a rough breakdown:

• Vague, non-specific threat, first offense, juvenile: Probation to 6 months in a juvenile facility. Possibly no incarceration if it was truly a momentary lapse and theres strong mitigation (mental health issues, immaturity, etc.).
• Specific threat (weapon mentioned), first offense, adult: 12-24 months in federal prison. Could be lower with strong mitigation or Counterman-based defenses. Could be higher if there were significant enhancements.
• Swatting case (emergency response caused), first offense: 24-60 months, plus potentially hundreds of thousands in restitution. These cases are taken very seriously, and judges want to send a message.
• Detailed plan, specific targets, means to carry out: 60+ months. If prosecutors can show the defendant was actually planning to act, sentences can reach the statutory maximum or beyond (if there are multiple charges).

Again, these are generalizations. Every case is different. But the point is: this isn’t a slap on the wrist. Federal prison is a real possibility, even for first-time offenders.

Collateral Consequences: The Hidden Penalties

Here’s what alot of people don’t realize until its to late: the sentence itself (prison time, probation, fines) is only part of the story. A federal conviction comes with collateral consequences that can be just as devastating, if not more so.

Lifetime federal firearm prohibition: Under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g), anyone convicted of a felony (and even some misdemeanors involving domestic violence) is prohibited from possessing firearms for life. That means no hunting, no sport shooting, no personal protection. For some people, this is a dealbreaker career-wise (law enforcement, military).

Ineligibility for federal student loans and grants: Certain federal convictions make you ineligible for federal financial aid for college. For a young person, this can mean the difference between going to college and not going at all.

Deportation for non-citizens: If your child is not a U.S. citizen (even if there a lawful permanent resident), a federal conviction can trigger removal proceedings. Threat crimes can be classified as “aggravated felonies” or “crimes of moral turpitude,” both of which are deportable offenses. And once your deported for a criminal conviction, getting back into the U.S. is nearly impossible.

Professional licensing bars: Want to be a teacher? Doctor? Lawyer? Nurse? Accountant? Many professional licenses require background checks, and a federal conviction (especially one involving threats or violence) can be disqualifying. Even if the licensing board doesn’t automatically deny you, you’ll have to disclose it and explain it for the rest of your career.

Sex offender registration (in some cases): If the threat had any sexual component—like a threat of sexual assault, or if it was directed at someone in a sexually charged context—some jurisdictions require sex offender registration. This is rare in school threat cases, but its not unheard of. And once your on a sex offender registry, your life is effectively over in terms of where you can live, work, and exist in society.

These consequences don’t go away after you’ve “served your time.” There permanent. So when a prosecutor offers a plea deal that “avoids prison,” you need to ask: what are the collateral consequences? Because sometimes, the deal is worse then it looks.

Restitution: The Financial Devastation

I mentioned this earlier, but it bears repeating: if the threat caused an emergency response, the court will order restitution to cover the costs. And these costs can be staggering.

Schools and law enforcement agencies calculate every dollar they spent responding to the threat:

• Police officer salaries (including overtime)
• SWAT team deployment (this is expensive—specialized equipment, personnel, logistics)
• School closures (lost funding based on attendance, staff costs)
• Counseling services for affected students
• Increased security measures after the incident
• Investigation costs (detective hours, forensic analysis)

I’ve seen restitution orders in the $200,000-$500,000 range for serious swatting cases. Even more modest cases can result in $50,000-$100,000 in restitution.

And here’s the kicker: restitution is not dischargeable in bankruptcy. You can’t just file bankruptcy and walk away from it. It follows you. The government can garnish wages, seize tax refunds, and place liens on property. For a young person just starting there life, this debt is crushing.

Defense Strategies That Actually Work

Okay, so you understand the charges, the process, and the penalties. Now the big question: how do you actually defend against these charges? What strategies work?

Every case is different, but there are some common defense approaches that have proven effective in federal school threat cases.

First Amendment Defenses: Its Not Always a “True Threat”

The First Amendment protects alot of speech, even speech that’s offensive, disturbing, or violent. The question is: was the statement a “true threat,” or was it protected speech?

Thanks to the Counterman decision, this defense is stronger then ever. The key arguments here are:

• Hyperbole and exageration: The statement was so over-the-top that no reasonable person would take it seriously. Example: “I’m gonna kill everyone” said in frustration after failing a test—its hyperbolic venting, not a real threat.
• Satire or parody: The statement was meant as a joke or to make a point, not as a literal threat.
• Political speech: The statement was commentary on gun violence, school safety, or related political issues, not a personal threat.
• Context of the platform: The statement was made in a context (like a gaming platform or private chat) where violent, exagerated language is the norm and not ment literally.

Your attorney needs to build a record showing that the statement, in context, was not a genuine threat. That means gathering evidence about:

• The defendant’s history of similar statements that were never acted upon
• The norms of the platform or community where the statement was made
• The defendant’s lack of means or intent to carry out the threat
• The defendant’s state of mind at the time (were they joking, venting, trying to fit in?)

Lack of Subjective Intent (The Counterman Defense)

This is the big one post-Counterman. The prosecution has to prove the defendant knew there statement would be understood as a threat. For young people, especially those immersed in online cultures where violent rhetoric is common, this can be a powerful defense.

Your attorney should be arguing:

• The defendant is a teenager/young adult with an immature understanding of how there words would be percieved.
• The defendant has a history of using exagerated language without any intent to act.
• The defendant genuinely believed it would be understood as a joke or venting.
• The defendant did not consider the potential consequences because of there age and development.

To support this, you might bring in expert witnesses:

• Forensic psychologists who can testify about adolescent brain development, impulse control, and risk assessment.
• Digital culture experts who can explain the norms of online communities (e.g., gaming culture, meme culture) where violent language is performative, not literal.

Mental Health and Emotional Disturbance

If your child was experiencing a mental health crisis at the time of the post—depression, anxiety, suicidal ideation, reaction to bullying—this can be critical mitigation, and in some cases, a defense.

The argument here isn’t necessarily that your child was legally insane (thats a very high bar). Its that they were in a state of emotional distress that impaired there judgment and ability to understand the consequences of there actions. This is especially persuasive if:

• There’s a documented history of mental health treatment
• The threat was made during or shortly after a triggering event (e.g., being bullied, a breakup, a family crisis)
• The defendant has since sought treatment and is compliant with therapy/medication

Mental health evidence can also support arguments for diversion or alternative sentencing (treatment instead of incarceration).

Challenging the Evidence

Sometimes the best defense is attacking the evidence itself. Digital evidence isn’t perfect, and there are ways to challenge it:

• Authentication issues: Can the prosecution actually prove your child wrote the post? If the account was hacked, or if someone else had access to the device, the evidence is weaker.
• IP address problems: IP addresses can be spoofed, or multiple people might share the same IP (e.g., everyone on the same wifi network). Proving who specifically sent the message can be difficult.
• Account access: If the account wasn’t password-protected, or if the device was shared, you can argue that someone else might have made the post.
• Screenshots: Screenshots can be edited or fabricated. Your attorney might demand the original digital file, metadata, and chain of custody documentation.

Digital forensics can cut both ways. If your child’s devices show no evidence of planning, no searches for weapons or school layouts, no manifestos or violent content—that all helps the defense. It shows the threat was impulsive and not serious.

Negotiating for Diversion or Reduced Charges

In some cases, the best strategy isn’t to fight the charges at trial—it’s to negotiate a resolution that avoids a conviction altogether. Federal pre-trial diversion programs exist, though there not common, and there very hard to get into for threat cases.

But if your attorney can show:

• This is a first offense
• The defendant is young and immature
• There are significant mental health issues
• The threat was non-specific and never going to be acted upon
• The defendant and there family are committed to treatment and supervision

…then theres a chance the U.S. Attorney’s Office might agree to a deferred prosecution agreement. This means: the defendant completes certain conditions (treatment, community service, supervision), and if they do, the charges are dismissed and never result in a conviction.

This has to be negotiated before indictment. Once your child is indicted, diversion is almost always off the table. This is why early intervention—hiring an attorney in that first 72 hours—is so critical.

Another option: negotiating for the case to be handled at the state level instead of federal. State courts often have better diversion programs, especially for juveniles. An experienced attorney who has relationships with both the U.S. Attorney’s Office and the local DA’s office can sometimes facilitate this.

Why You Need a Federal Criminal Defense Attorney (Not Just Any Lawyer)

I can’t stress this enough: if your facing federal charges, you need an attorney who specializes in federal criminal defense. Not your family lawyer. Not a general criminal defense attorney who mostly handles DUIs and state-level cases. A federal criminal defense attorney.

Why? Because federal court is a different world.

Federal Court Is Different

Federal court has its own rules, procedures, and culture. Its more formal then state court. The judges are appointed for life and tend to be more experienced (and often more rigid). The prosecutors—Assistant U.S. Attorneys—are generally very skilled and have far more resources then state prosecutors.

An attorney who practices regularly in federal court will know:

• The Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure
• The Federal Rules of Evidence
• The Sentencing Guidelines inside and out
• How to file the right motions at the right times
• The local rules of the specific federal district (which vary)
• The judges’ individual tendencies and preferences

They’ll also be admitted to the federal court bar, which is required to practice there. Your state court attorney might not even have that admission.

Knowing the U.S. Attorneys Office

Federal districts have different cultures and priorities. The U.S. Attorney’s Office in the Southern District of New York (Manhattan) is different from the Eastern District of New York (Brooklyn), which is different from the Northern District of Texas.

Some districts are more aggressive about prosecuting school threats. Some are more open to negotiation. Some have better relationships with defense attorneys and are willing to discuss diversion. Some are rigid and take everything to trial.

An experienced federal defense attorney in your district will know:

• Which prosecutors are reasonable and which are hardliners
• What arguments are likely to work with the local U.S. Attorney’s Office
• Whether diversion is even a possibility in your district
• How to position your case for the best outcome

This institutional knowledge is invaluable. A lawyer from out of town, or someone who doesn’t regularly practice in federal court, won’t have it.

What to Look for in Federal Defense Counsel

When your interviewing attorneys, ask these questions:

• Are you admitted to practice in the federal district where my case is (or will be)?
• How many federal threat cases have you handled?
• What outcomes have you achieved in those cases?
• Do you have experience with the specific U.S. Attorney’s Office handling my case?
• Are you familiar with the Counterman decision and how to use it?
• Do you have relationships with expert witnesses (psychologists, digital forensics) who can help?
• Can you handle this at the pre-indictment stage, or only after charges are filed?

If the attorney can’t answer these confidently, keep looking.

Pre-Indictment Representation Is Critical

The absolute best time to hire an attorney is before charges are filed. Once your child is indicted, you’ve lost the opportunity to prevent it. Pre-indictment representation means your attorney can:

• Communicate with prosecutors before they’ve made a charging decision
• Provide mitigating information that might lead to no charges
• Negotiate for diversion or alternative resolutions
• Argue for state-level handling instead of federal
• Prevent your child from making damaging statements

This doesn’t mean you’ll definitely avoid charges. But it gives you the best chance. And even if charges are filed, you’ll be in a stronger position because your attorney has been involved from the start.

Immediate Action Steps: What to Do Right Now

Alright, so your in crisis mode. The FBI has called, or there at your door, or the school has informed you of an investigation. What do you do right now?

If You’ve Been Contacted by the FBI

☐ Do NOT speak to agents without an attorney present. Be polite but firm: “I want to cooperate, but I need to speak with an attorney first.”

☐ Invoke your Fifth Amendment rights if necessary. If agents are pushing, say clearly: “I’m invoking my right to remain silent and my right to an attorney.” Then stop talking.

☐ Do NOT consent to searches of devices, vehicles, or your home. If they ask, say: “I do not consent to a search.” If they have a warrant, don’t resist, but make it clear you’re not consenting.

☐ Write down everything the agents said. As soon as there gone, write down who came, what they asked, what they said, and what you said. This will help your attorney.

☐ Call a federal criminal defense attorney immediately. Don’t wait. Every hour matters.

If Your Child Has Been Contacted

☐ Assert your parental rights to be present if your child is under 18. Schools and police sometimes try to interview minors without parents. Don’t let that happen.

☐ Do not let school administrators question your child about the alleged criminal conduct. School discipline is one thing; criminal conduct is another. Politely decline and say your attorney will be in touch.

☐ Hire a federal criminal defense attorney within 72 hours. This is the window where pre-indictment intervention is most effective.

☐ Do not delete anything from devices. Deleting evidence can be charged as obstruction of justice. Even if your child already deleted the post, don’t delete anything else.

If Devices Have Been Seized

☐ Document what was taken. Write down what devices were seized, when, and by whom. Get copies of any receipts or inventories the agents provide.

☐ Assume everything will be recovered. Even “deleted” messages, browsing history, and app data can be extracted by federal forensics. Don’t assume anything is gone.

☐ Do not discuss the case on remaining devices. If your child still has a phone or computer, assume it could be monitored (though this is rare without a warrant). Don’t text or email about the case.

If the School Has Suspended or Expelled Your Child

☐ Understand that this is seperate from the criminal case. School discipline and criminal charges are different processes, even though there related.

☐ Do NOT waive your hearing rights. You have the right to appeal the school’s decision. Don’t give that up.

☐ Coordinate your criminal attorney with an education attorney. You might need seperate counsel for the school proceeding, but make sure there communicating so you don’t undermine your criminal defense.

In the Next 72 Hours

☐ Contact a federal criminal defense attorney immediately. I know I keep saying this, but it really is that important.

☐ Preserve all evidence that helps your child. This includes:

• Mental health records (if your child has been in treatment)
• Context for the statement (was your child being bullied? Did something traumatic just happen?)
• Evidence of your child’s immaturity or online habits (do they frequently use hyperbolic language that’s never serious?)

☐ Do not post on social media about the case. Anything you say publicly can be discovered and used. Stay off social media.

☐ Prepare for the possibility of arrest or indictment. Your attorney will help you understand what to expect and how to prepare.

The Path Forward

Look, I’m not gonna lie to you—federal school threat charges are serious. There not something you can ignore or hope will go away. The consequences, if your child is convicted, can be life-altering. Federal prison. A permanent criminal record. Collateral consequences that follow them for decades.

But heres the thing: not all federal investigations lead to charges. And not all charges lead to convictions. And even when there is a conviction, there are still ways to fight for the best possible outcome—whether thats a reduced sentence, probation instead of prison, or diversion that avoids a conviction altogether.

The key is early action. The decisions you make in the first 72 hours can literally determine the trajectory of the entire case. If you wait, if you let your child talk to investigators without a lawyer, if you consent to searches thinking you have nothing to hide—you’ve made it exponentially harder to defend the case.

If your reading this because your in the middle of a crisis, here’s what you need to do right now: stop reading and call a federal criminal defense attorney. Not tomorow. Not after you “think about it.” Now. Every hour that passes is an hour where investigators are building there case, and your losing opportunities to protect your child.

And if your reading this because your just trying to understand what might happen—because your child made a stupid comment online and now your worried—then take this as a warning. The federal government does not mess around with school threats, irregardless of context or intent. What seems like a joke to a teenager can be a federal crime to a prosecutor. The best thing you can do is educate your child about the stakes and make sure they understand that what they post online can have real, life-destroying consequences.

Your child’s future doesn’t have to be defined by one stupid mistake. But protecting that future requires action—immediate, informed action. Don’t wait.

If you or your child is facing a federal school threat investigation or charges, contact our office immediately for a free, confidential consultation. We represent clients in federal courts across New York, including the Southern District (Manhattan) and Eastern District (Brooklyn). We’re available 24/7 for emergencies, and we can intervene at the pre-indictment stage to give you the best possible chance of a favorable outcome.

Don’t let a moment of poor judgment destroy your child’s life. Call us now.