[OWK]

Yeah. Amazing thing: in most states I've heard of, it's called "communicating a terrorist threat."

And strangely enough, it was already called assault (which was already against the law).

Or is there something special about a judge, that makes it necessary to differentiate him from the "commoners", by having a special class of crime for assaulting them?

[Poohbah]

If there is, it's in the sense that threatening a judge over the official performance of his duties is actually threatening ALL of the "commoners" in one pass.

However, in California, verbally threatening me (a "commoner") can be charged as "communicating a terrorist threat." I think the difference between that and assault is that assault requires someone's physical presence--i.e., it has to be in person--whereas "terrorist threats" can be communicated in writing or by phone. There is an element of direct threat (i.e., not shooting one's mouth off at a bar about how one will "shoot that so-and-so"), but not the direct presence.

[michigander]

US CODE
TITLE 18
PART I - CRIMES

CHAPTER 7 ASSAULT

CHAPTER 18 CONGRESSIONAL, CABINET, AND SUPREME COURT ASSASSINATION, KIDNAPPING, AND ASSAULT