From the State to the Courtroom: Offenses Against Government and Justice Compared

Treason is the benchmark offense against the state. The recorded sources note that the United States Constitution confines it to levying war against the nation or adhering to its enemies and giving them aid and comfort, and that conviction requires the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act or a confession in open court. Start here to see how much proof the law demands before it punishes disloyalty.

Sedition sits just below treason. The recorded sources describe it as overt conduct, such as speech or organization, that tends toward rebellion against the established order, without the levying of war or the aid to an enemy that treason involves. The sources also stress that the overt acts which can be prosecuted vary by jurisdiction, so compare it with treason to see where the line is drawn.

Espionage protects state secrets rather than the state itself. The recorded sources cite United States prosecution under 18 U.S.C. sections 792 through 798 and Article 106a of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, and define it around obtaining or transmitting national defense information. Unlike treason, it does not require that the information be given to an enemy.

Bribery turns from attacks on the state to corruption inside it. The recorded sources define it as the corrupt solicitation, payment or acceptance of a private favor in exchange for official action, and cite 18 U.S. Code section 201 on bribery of public officials and witnesses. The exchange for an official act is what separates bribery from a lawful gift.

Racketeering shows corruption organized as a continuing enterprise. The recorded sources trace the United States framework to the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, enacted in the Organized Crime Control Act of 1970, which allows a charge for a pattern of at least two acts of racketeering activity from a list of 35 crimes within a ten year period. Read it as the step from individual bribes to prosecuting a whole criminal enterprise.

Perjury moves the path into the courtroom. The recorded sources describe it as the intentional act of swearing a false oath concerning matters material to an official proceeding, and note that conviction requires both the intention to commit the act and the act itself. In England and Wales it is created by section 1(1) of the Perjury Act 1911.

Obstruction of justice is the broad offense of interfering with the justice system. The recorded sources say United States federal obstruction offenses are defined primarily in Chapter 73 of Title 18, and that the Omnibus Clause reaches anyone who corruptly endeavors to influence, obstruct or impede the due administration of justice in a pending court proceeding. Compare its breadth with the narrower offense of perjury.

Contempt of court closes the path with the court protecting its own authority. The recorded sources describe two broad categories, being disrespectful to legal authorities in the courtroom and willfully failing to obey a court order, and cite 18 U.S.C. sections 401 through 403 and Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 42 for the United States. It shows how a court can act to defend its own process.