Butler, Pennsylvania Man Pleads Guilty to Online Threats to Assassinate President Trump and Kill ICE Agents

A Butler, Pennsylvania man named Shawn Monper has pleaded guilty to federal charges of making threats to assassinate President Donald Trump and kill U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents, the Department of Justice announced. The threats were made in a series of online posts on YouTube and were uncovered during an FBI investigation, marking another case in a growing pattern of individuals facing federal prosecution for violent rhetoric targeting public officials on social media platforms.

The case against Monper underscores the federal government’s increasingly aggressive posture toward individuals who make violent threats against public officials online. Under 18 U.S.C. § 871, it is a federal crime to knowingly and willfully make threats against the president, the president-elect, or certain other officials in the line of succession. The statute has been on the books since 1917 and has been invoked with growing frequency in the social media era, where threatening language can reach vast audiences instantly. According to U.S. Secret Service data, the agency investigates thousands of threats against protectees annually, with the volume of online threats rising sharply in recent years. Monper’s posts on YouTube reportedly contained explicit language describing intentions to assassinate Trump and to target ICE agents—rhetoric that crossed the legal threshold from protected speech under the First Amendment into prosecutable criminal threats. The FBI, which monitors online platforms for credible threats of violence, identified the posts and launched a formal investigation that ultimately led to Monper’s arrest and prosecution.

The fact that Monper hails from Butler, Pennsylvania adds an especially notable dimension to this case. On July 13, 2024, Butler was the site of an actual assassination attempt against then-candidate Trump during a campaign rally, in which a gunman opened fire and struck Trump in the ear, killed one rally attendee, and critically wounded two others before being neutralized by Secret Service agents. That incident dramatically elevated the national conversation around political violence and threats against public figures. Federal law enforcement agencies, including the FBI and Secret Service, have since signaled a heightened vigilance regarding threats—particularly those emerging from online platforms. The Monper case also highlights the dual nature of the threats: not only was the president targeted, but so were federal law enforcement officers carrying out immigration enforcement duties. Threats against ICE agents have risen in parallel with intensifying political debates over immigration policy, deportation operations, and border security. The Department of Homeland Security has previously reported an uptick in threats and harassment directed at ICE personnel, particularly during periods of heightened enforcement activity.

Legal experts note that the guilty plea likely spares Monper the risk of a harsher sentence that could follow a trial conviction, though he still faces significant penalties. Under federal sentencing guidelines, threats against the president can carry up to five years of imprisonment, fines, and a period of supervised release. Threats against federal officers under separate statutes can carry additional penalties. The case will now move to the sentencing phase, where a federal judge will consider factors including Monper’s criminal history, the specificity and credibility of the threats, and whether there was any evidence of concrete planning beyond the online posts. The Justice Department’s prosecution of this case sends a clear signal that federal authorities are treating online threats with the same seriousness as those delivered through traditional means. As political tensions remain elevated nationwide, law enforcement officials have emphasized that social media posts are subject to the same legal scrutiny as any other form of communication. Observers will be watching the sentencing closely for what it signals about the judiciary’s approach to politically motivated online threats in an era of increasing political violence.