Yes. It's a modern myth, but the formal offense in 1351 required an actual plot towards regicide (or curiously enough, imprisonment of the king), but not idle thoughts. Oddly enough the treason clause's "overt acts" requirement ultimately derives from it!
"Caesar had his Brutus — Charles the First, His Cromwell — And George the Third" — ("Treason!" cried the Speaker — "Treason, treason!" echoed from every part of the house). Henry faultered not for an instant, but rising to a loftier attitude, concluded thus ...
- "may profit by their example. If this be treason, make the most of it." (Evidently it was possible to speak of the possible death of a king and counter the "treason" charge) /end
Heh. Would have been under parliamentary immunity anyway, I think.
Would need to look it up, but IIRC parliamentary immunity wasn't a defense against high treason (at least not until the civil war)
Kind of the constitutional question at stake in that war, huh As the nature of the Union was in ours
Right. Charles famously tried to arrest members in the chamber on treason charges, and, then things happened and parliament chopped of his head
Yup. The two witnesses rule, too. Fun fact during WWII that was seen as too antiquated and problematic. So they passed a new law for "treachery" and hanged a few traitors under that.
(the UK did, that is, not the US)
You know, I've sometimes wondered if the treason clause should be read as preventing the creation of "basically treason" crimes And if so, what that says about seditious conspiracy and the Espionage Act
Yes, that's kind of the thing that it doesn't really limit anything unless you specifically try to call it "treason." I suppose you could make the theoretical argument. I wouldn't bet on it ever working.
Maybe something there to tease out about how treason back then technically wasn't a felony, it was a different category unto itself.
Also there were subcategories of it! What we think of as treason now is really high treason, but there were petit treasons too
Hey so what brings this up?
LOL Uhhhh go scroll for a bit, you'll see
In theory you could still have that because it wouldn't be "against the United States."
Closest equivalent is some of the more aggressive CFAA "unauthorized access" claims by converting ToS or employee misconduct claims up to automatic felonies
It's only treason if it comes from the Treachery region of France. Otherwise it's just sparkling sedition.
I mean, tbf the US did basically the same at around the same time with the Espionage Act
Right. Sent the Operation Pastorius spies to the electric chair using that, and then later the Rosenbergs.