United States v. MacKey
143 F.4th 129
| 2d Cir. | 2025Background
- Douglass Mackey was convicted after a jury trial for conspiring to injure citizens in the exercise of their right to vote, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 241, based on three "text-to-vote" memes he posted on Twitter shortly before the 2016 election.
- The core allegation was that Mackey's memes suggested to Clinton supporters that they could vote by text, potentially misleading them about valid voting methods.
- The government argued Mackey was part of a conspiracy organized through private Twitter groups ("War Room," "Micro Chat," and "Madman #2") to suppress Clinton votes.
- Evidence showed Mackey was once active in these groups, but was not a member or active participant during the key period when the false memes were discussed and disseminated by others.
- There was no direct evidence that Mackey saw relevant group messages before posting the memes; he claimed to have obtained them independently from public sources like 4chan.
- The Second Circuit reversed the conviction, finding the evidence insufficient to prove Mackey knowingly joined a conspiracy, and ordered the district court to enter judgment of acquittal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for conspiracy under 18 U.S.C. § 241 | Mackey knowingly conspired through coordinated conduct | Mackey acted independently, no proof of knowing agreement | For Mackey |
| Whether group membership implied conspiratorial agreement | Posting similar memes after group discussion showed agreement | Mere association or similar activity does not prove conspiracy | For Mackey |
| Impact of circumstantial evidence (retweets, shared goals) | Retweeting like-minded users supports conspiracy finding | Retweeting or sharing memes common/political speech, not proof | For Mackey |
| Legal requirement of knowing, unlawful agreement | Mackey's participation fit established group patterns | Insufficient evidence he was aware of or joined any such agreement | For Mackey |
Key Cases Cited
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (1979) (setting the standard for sufficiency of evidence for criminal conviction)
- United States v. Bufalino, 285 F.2d 408 (2d Cir. 1960) (requiring more than parallel conduct to establish conspiracy)
- United States v. Anderson, 747 F.3d 51 (2d Cir. 2014) (reasonable inferences and corroborative evidence required in conspiracy)
- United States v. Aquart, 912 F.3d 1 (2d Cir. 2018) (conviction cannot stand on nonexistent or meager evidence)
- United States v. Persico, 645 F.3d 85 (2d Cir. 2011) (standard for reviewing sufficiency of evidence on appeal)
- United States v. Nusraty, 867 F.2d 759 (2d Cir. 1989) (mere association not enough for conspiracy)
- Callanan v. United States, 364 U.S. 587 (1961) (Congress’s rationale for criminalizing conspiracy)
- United States v. Price, 383 U.S. 787 (1966) (scope and application of Section 241)