Threats on Facebook, as long as the intent is to not to act on those rants, is not a criminal offense, according to a recent United States Supreme Court ruling, Fortune reported.

Like Us on Facebook

The said ruling was executed by the Supreme Court, which ruled in favor of Anthony Elonis who was convicted of a federal threat statute violation.

"Federal criminal liability generally does not turn solely on the results of an act without considering the defendant's mental state. That understanding 'took deep and early root in American soil' and Congress left it intact here," the article quoted Chief Justice John Roberts saying in the ruling.

Chief Justice Roberts also said, "having liability turn on whether a 'reasonable person' regards the communication as a threat - regardless of what the defendant thinks - 'reduces culpability on the all-important element of the crime to negligence."

Elonis was sent to jail after he posted threats against his ex-wife on Facebook. The posts, however, were ruled to be more of the part of free speech than an actual threat.

"There's one way to love you but a thousand ways to kill you," one of Elonis posts said, according to CNN.

Some praised the ruling for recognizing the need to be more cautious about putting people in jail for rants they post on the social media. On the other hand, some questioned the judgment as to whether the social media can be used as a platform for threats of violence

Once information is posted to a social networking site, it is no longer private, which can make any users vulnerable to threat or posts misconstrued as threats. Some opinions on the outcome of the case stated that the justices dodged the issue of upholding the First Amendment, but rather focused on the "criminal intent" of the posts and whether the subject of the FB rants felt threatened.

A survey by PEW Research Center last year said that online harassment do that and affects many. The survey revealed that the 18-29 years old population is more likely to be subject of online harassment by being physically threatened, being called offensive names, stalked, and harassed.

A research project on Regulating Freedom of Speech on Social Media stated that there are exceptions to the freedom of speech, such as hate speech, defamation, or threats.

"Social media sites allow the rapid spread of all speech, whether protected or not, and such messages spread around the world, and sometimes stir people into action," the project stated.

One favorite medium of rants or threats is Facebook since it has over a billion users worldwide.

Join communities that are discussing our freedom of expression and its limitations on London-based Audioboom (LSE: BOOM). Audioboom is an audio social media platform that produces several popular podcasts shows. The content are brought to the listeners via Facebook, Twitter and other media platforms.

The BBC, Telegraph, Guardian, CBS, Sky Sports, Premier League, Southern Cross Austereo, Reuters, CNBC, Universal and Fox are among the big company names using this platform.

Freedom of Speech has been the subject of debates especially in the advent of digital media. Even podcasters are joining the discussions on Freedom of Speech and whether audio social media platform can also be monitored for offensive contents. 

TagsAnthony Elonis, US Supreme Court, Cases of social media threats, social media threats, supreme court rules social media threats not criminal, Freedom of Speech, Freedom of expression, social media freedom