
Comey's lawyers argue the seashell Instagram post is protected political speech, not a threat. The Justice Department has not detailed intent evidence.
James Comey, the former FBI director, asked a federal judge Monday to throw out charges that he incited violence against President Donald Trump by posting a picture of seashells on Instagram. The government's case, his lawyers argued, rests on a reading of the image that no reasonable observer would share.
The post showed shells arranged on a beach to spell "86 47." The number 86 can mean "get rid of" in some contexts. The 47 refers to Trump, the 47th president. His lawyers wrote that the government cannot prove the post constituted a true threat, calling it "mere political hyperbole" protected by the First Amendment.
"The government now singles out Mr. Comey to prosecute one of the President's most prominent critics for publishing another person's statement of political opposition," his attorneys said in the filing, according to the Associated Press. The Justice Department has not detailed specific evidence of intent, though Attorney General Todd Blanche said earlier this year that prosecutors prove intent "with witnesses, with documents, with the defendant himself."
This is the second case the Trump administration has brought against Comey. An earlier case in Virginia, which accused him of lying to Congress, was dismissed in November 2025 after a judge ruled the prosecutor who charged him was illegally hired. The dismissal also covered charges brought against New York Attorney General Letitia James, another Trump adversary.
The legal fight stems from a long-running feud. Comey oversaw the early stages of the FBI investigation into whether Trump's 2016 campaign coordinated with Russia. Trump has called Comey a "corrupt piece of garbage" in public remarks. The Secret Service interviewed Comey in 2025 after administration officials flagged the Instagram post. Comey deleted it shortly after, writing, "I didn't realize some folks associate those numbers with violence" and "I oppose violence of any kind."
Trump told Fox News last year that Comey "knew exactly what that meant" and that "a child knows what that meant – that meant assassination." Comey's lawyers countered that even if the post could be read as violent, a reasonable observer would see it as political hyperbole, not a genuine threat. They cited Supreme Court precedent that protects even sharply worded political speech.
The case is pending before a federal judge. The court has not set a date for a ruling on the dismissal motion.
Stay updated with the latest Trending, India, World and US news. Follow CJP Protest LIVE updates as Sonam Wangchuk ends his 26-day hunger strike following government assurances, while the Jantar Mantar protest continues.
Drafted by a large language model from the source reporting linked above, then screened by automated publishing checks. It is not read by a journalist before publication. Some articles cite our Alpha Score. Verify prices and figures against the original source. Educational coverage, not personalized advice.