Comey moves to dismiss seashell case as ’86 47′ message was not a ‘true threat’

Court Battles Comey moves to dismiss seashell case as ’86 47′ message was not a ‘true threat’ Comments: by Rebecca Beitsch - 07/27/26 11:59 AM ET Comments: Link copied by Rebecca Beitsch - 07/27/26 11:59 AM ET Comments: Link copied

NOW PLAYING

Former FBI Director James Comey on Monday asked the court to toss the case accusing him of threatening President Trump’s life, arguing that posting a picture of seashells spelling out “86 47” could not be considered a “true threat.”

The filing was made in the Eastern District of North Carolina where Comey visited the beach in 2025 and stumbled upon the message in the sand, which he then shared online.

“To justify this prosecution, the indictment alleges that Mr. Comey’s ‘86 47’ post constitutes a ‘true threat’ on the President’s life. That claim is contradicted by every possible source of meaning: dictionaries, context, precedent, and common sense,” Comey’s attorneys wrote in the filing.

“‘86’ simply means ‘get rid of’ or ‘eject’ and has no violent connotation except in the most uncommon usages. Most dictionaries do not even list the meaning—’to kill’—that the government now proposes. And when combined with “47”—slang for President Trump, the forty-seventh President—’86’ becomes nothing more than a call to oppose President Trump. Thus, in this context, no reasonable observer would understand the phrase ‘86 47’ to connote violence at all—let alone to threaten that Mr. Comey personally would commit violence against the President.”

The filing argues Comey is being prosecuted for “publishing another person’s statement of political opposition” by sharing the photo, something they argue violates First Amendment protections of free speech.

While speech threatening violence can be prosecuted, Comey’s attorneys argue his actions fail to meet the test for bringing such cases.

The Constitution, they argue, protects hyperbole and said the indictment must still be dismissed as Comey gave “no indication of his intent to engage in a violent act.”

“Forcing Mr. Comey to stand trial for a statement opposing the President—even if he is ultimately acquitted—would itself be an unconstitutional punishment of free speech. And it would invite future prosecutions by the Executive Branch against perceived political enemies for their opposition to the President,” they wrote.

Add as preferred source on Google Tags James Comey

Comments: Link copied