The lawyer Acevedo Garcia defines what cyberbullying is and contextualizes it with Supreme Court Jurisprudence. He analyzes the different criminal statues currently available to be used against perpetrators of cyberbullying, explains their history and critiques how different evidentiary issues make said statues virtually inapplicable. Acevedo Garcia particularly focuses on how the First Amendment doctrines act as major constitutional hurdles for much of the existing criminal regulation designed to curb or eradicate cyberbullying. Given the various obstacles to applying criminal statutes, Acevedo Garcia proceeds to discuss the different civil remedies available that could be used by cyberbullying victims to find redress against the perpetrators. Specifically, after an in depth discussion of the pros and cons of intentional infliction of emotional distress torts, the author concludes that it is the best option for cyberbullying victims.
Cita: Juan M. Acevedo García, Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress Torts as the Best Option for Victims when Cyberbullying Conduct Falls through the Cracks of the U.S. Criminal Law System, 85 Rev. Jur. UPR 127 (2016).