Under 18 U.S.C. 2384, seditious conspiracy is the federal crime of two or more people agreeing to use force against the United States government — to overthrow it, wage war on it, resist its authority, obstruct the execution of federal law, or seize its property. Conviction carries up to 20 years in federal prison and a fine of up to $250,000.1Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 18 USC 2384 – Seditious Conspiracy2Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 18 USC 3571 – Sentence of Fine The statute reaches far beyond attempted revolution. Any coordinated agreement to use force against federal authority can qualify, even if the plan never succeeds or barely gets off the ground.
What the Statute Prohibits
Section 2384 defines five categories of conduct. When two or more people agree to carry any of them out by force, the crime is complete:
- Conspiring to overthrow the federal government
- Conspiring to levy war against the United States
- Conspiring to forcibly resist the government’s lawful exercise of power
- Conspiring to forcibly prevent, delay, or interfere with the execution of any federal law
- Conspiring to forcibly seize or possess U.S. government property without authorization
The fourth category — obstructing the execution of a federal law — is the broadest and the one prosecutors most often reach for. It does not require any plan to topple the government wholesale. An armed group’s agreement to physically stop federal agents from enforcing a particular law can be enough.1Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 18 USC 2384 – Seditious Conspiracy
What Prosecutors Have to Prove
Two elements have to be established beyond a reasonable doubt: an agreement between two or more people, and the shared intent to use force against federal authority. Unlike general federal conspiracy under 18 U.S.C. 371, seditious conspiracy has no overt-act requirement. The agreement itself is the crime.3Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 18 USC 371 – Conspiracy to Commit Offense or to Defraud United States
The Agreement
There is no requirement of a formal contract or explicit verbal commitment. Courts routinely infer agreement from circumstantial evidence: encrypted messages, social media posts, financial transactions, coordinated travel, weapons purchases. In the Oath Keepers prosecution, thousands of messages formed the backbone of the case, including statements such as “we aren’t getting through this without a civil war.” No single conspirator needs to know every detail of the plan. What matters is knowingly joining a collective effort toward the same unlawful objective.
Intent to Use Force
Talking about revolution over dinner is not a federal crime. Prosecutors have to prove an actual intent to use force, not merely radical politics or inflammatory rhetoric. Intent is typically inferred from conduct: stockpiling weapons, paramilitary training, surveillance of government buildings, recruitment for a specific operation. In the 1995 prosecution of Sheikh Omar Abdel-Rahman and nine co-conspirators for plotting to bomb landmarks in New York City, the court found that sermons and writings inciting violent action, combined with concrete planning, demonstrated criminal intent. The Second Circuit upheld the convictions.4FindLaw. United States v. Rahman (1999)
The line between protected speech and criminal intent is thin and hard for juries to evaluate. Courts look at the totality of a defendant’s words and actions rather than isolated statements.
Why the Missing Overt Act Matters
In practice, prosecutors almost always present evidence of concrete steps because juries expect it. Legally, though, they only need to prove the agreement and the intent. That makes Section 2384 more potent than general conspiracy law.
Penalties
The statutory maximum is 20 years in federal prison, a fine of up to $250,000 for an individual, or both.1Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 18 USC 2384 – Seditious Conspiracy2Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 18 USC 3571 – Sentence of Fine These penalties apply whether or not any violence actually occurred; the conspiracy alone is enough.
There is no sentencing guideline written specifically for seditious conspiracy. Under U.S.S.G. 2X5.1, sentencing courts apply the most analogous guideline. In the Oath Keepers plea negotiations, the parties stipulated that obstruction of justice under U.S.S.G. 2J1.2, with a base offense level of 14, was the closest fit.5U.S. Department of Justice. Plea Offer for United States v. Joshua James From that starting point, enhancements for leadership role, number of participants, use of weapons, and extent of planning can push the range dramatically higher.
In the same case, Judge Amit Mehta applied a terrorism enhancement, the first in a January 6 prosecution. A terrorism finding under the guidelines can add years to a sentence and reflects the court’s view that the conduct was calculated to influence government policy through intimidation. The government sought 25 years for Stewart Rhodes; he received 18.
Liability for What Co-Conspirators Do
Joining a seditious conspiracy exposes you not only to conviction for the conspiracy itself but also to liability for crimes other members commit in carrying it out. Under the Pinkerton doctrine, established by the Supreme Court in 1946, a conspirator is liable for any substantive offense committed by a co-conspirator if that offense was in furtherance of the conspiracy and was a reasonably foreseeable consequence of the agreement.6Legal Information Institute. Pinkerton v. United States
This is where seditious conspiracy charges become especially dangerous for peripheral participants. Someone who handled logistics or funding can be held liable for violent acts committed by others, even acts they did not personally authorize, if those acts were a natural outgrowth of the conspiracy’s objectives. In the Oath Keepers case, Stewart Rhodes never entered the Capitol building, yet he received the longest sentence because the court found he directed the operation.
Defenses That Have Worked
First Amendment Protection
The most common defense is that the conduct amounted to protected political speech rather than criminal conspiracy. In Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969), the Supreme Court held that even advocacy of illegal action is constitutionally protected unless it is both directed at inciting imminent lawless action and likely to produce it.7Justia. Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 US 444 (1969) Angry rhetoric about government tyranny, abstract calls for resistance, and statements that sound alarming in isolation may not cross the constitutional line. This defense succeeded in the Hutaree militia case in 2012, where a federal judge ordered acquittals on seditious conspiracy charges because the government had leaned too heavily on hateful speech and failed to prove any concrete plan for rebellion.
No Actual Agreement
Association with an extremist group, attendance at rallies, or inflammatory online posts do not by themselves establish a conspiracy. Vague or hypothetical “what if” discussions fall short of a mutual commitment to an unlawful objective. Defense lawyers frequently press this point, arguing that overlapping social circles and shared grievances are not the same as an agreement to act.
Entrapment
When the FBI uses undercover agents or informants, which is common in domestic terrorism investigations, defendants may argue entrapment. The defense requires showing that the government induced the crime and that the defendant was not otherwise predisposed to commit it. Courts examine whether the defendant was already inclined toward the criminal conduct before law enforcement became involved, or whether agents manufactured the conspiracy.
Withdrawal from the Conspiracy
A defendant who abandoned the conspiracy before it was carried out may have a defense. Withdrawal requires more than quietly drifting away. The defendant has to take affirmative steps inconsistent with the conspiracy’s purpose and make reasonable efforts to communicate the withdrawal to co-conspirators, and the burden of proof falls on the defense by a preponderance of the evidence.8Ninth Circuit District and Bankruptcy Courts. Withdrawal From Conspiracy – Model Jury Instructions Withdrawal does not erase liability for the conspiracy up to that point, but it can cut off exposure to crimes committed by others afterward and may start the statute of limitations clock.
How It Compares to Treason, Insurrection, and General Conspiracy
Section 2384 sits alongside several related federal offenses, and prosecutors pick among them based on what they can prove and what penalty they want to seek.
Treason is the only crime defined in the Constitution itself. Article III limits it to levying war against the United States or giving aid and comfort to its enemies, and conviction requires either two witnesses to the same overt act or an open confession in court. Those requirements make treason charges extraordinarily rare; the last federal treason prosecution was in 1952. Seditious conspiracy is easier to prove and carries a comparable sentence, which is why prosecutors almost always prefer it.
Rebellion or insurrection under 18 U.S.C. 2383 carries up to 10 years and permanent disqualification from any federal office.9Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 18 USC 2383 – Rebellion or Insurrection The office-holding bar is unique to that statute and does not attach to a Section 2384 conviction. But the maximum prison term is half of what seditious conspiracy allows, which helps explain the government’s preference for 2384 in major cases.
General federal conspiracy under 18 U.S.C. 371 criminalizes any agreement to commit a federal offense or defraud the United States. It caps the penalty at five years and requires proof of an overt act.3Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 18 USC 371 – Conspiracy to Commit Offense or to Defraud United States Seditious conspiracy is the specialized, higher-penalty version aimed at conspiracies that target the government itself through force.
Life After Conviction
A Section 2384 conviction creates permanent consequences that reach nearly every part of a person’s life.
Firearms
Federal law permanently bars anyone convicted of a crime punishable by more than one year in prison from possessing firearms or ammunition. Because seditious conspiracy carries up to 20 years, the prohibition attaches automatically and is effectively lifelong.10Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 18 USC 922 – Unlawful Acts
Employment and Licensing
Government employment, military service, and any role requiring a security clearance are effectively foreclosed. Background checks in finance, law, and corporate management will surface the conviction. Professional licenses in law, medicine, and engineering are typically revoked, and reinstatement is rarely granted for an offense of this nature.
Immigration
For non-citizens, the consequences are severe. Federal immigration law makes deportable anyone who has engaged in activity aimed at overthrowing the U.S. government by force. Separately, conviction of any Chapter 115 offense — which includes seditious conspiracy — carrying a possible sentence of five or more years is an independent ground for removal.11Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 8 USC 1227 – Deportable Aliens Legal permanent residents, visa holders, and asylum recipients are all exposed to removal proceedings.
Voting and Civil Rights
A federal felony conviction costs the right to vote, though the duration and process for restoration vary by state. Some states permanently disenfranchise people convicted of certain felonies; others restore voting rights after the sentence is complete. The right to hold public office and to serve on a federal jury is also lost.
Notable Convictions
Seditious conspiracy charges have always been rare, and successful convictions rarer still.
In 1954, four Puerto Rican nationalists opened fire on the House floor from the visitor gallery, wounding several representatives. They and more than a dozen associates were convicted of seditious conspiracy. Decades later, Oscar Lopez Rivera, leader of a Puerto Rican independence group behind a bombing campaign in the 1970s and 1980s, served 35 years on seditious conspiracy charges before President Obama commuted his sentence in 2017.
The 1995 conviction of Sheikh Omar Abdel-Rahman and nine co-conspirators for plotting to bomb the United Nations, FBI headquarters, and New York City infrastructure was the most prominent use of the statute in a terrorism context before January 6. The Second Circuit upheld the convictions.4FindLaw. United States v. Rahman (1999)
The statute’s limits showed in 2012, when a federal judge acquitted members of the Hutaree militia in Michigan because prosecutors had relied too heavily on inflammatory rhetoric and failed to prove an actual plan for armed rebellion.
The January 6, 2021, Capitol breach produced the first successful seditious conspiracy convictions in decades. Oath Keepers founder Stewart Rhodes was convicted in November 2022 and sentenced to 18 years, the longest sentence in any January 6 case at that time. Florida chapter leader Kelly Meggs received 12 years.12United States Department of Justice. Court Sentences Two Oath Keepers Leaders to 18 Years in Prison for Seditious Conspiracy and Other Charges Related to U.S. Capitol Breach Proud Boys leader Enrique Tarrio received 22 years, the longest individual sentence connected to January 6, with co-defendants Ethan Nordean and Dominic Pezzola sentenced to 18 and 10 years. In January 2025, President Trump commuted Rhodes’ sentence and pardoned or commuted sentences for numerous other January 6 defendants.