An 18-year-old from Tewksbury has been charged in federal court with threatening to kill President Donald Trump, the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Boston announced Thursday, November 5, 2026, according to WCVB, Boston 25 News, NBC10 Boston, MassLive and 7News. Trenton Touch is charged by criminal complaint with making a threat against the President of the United States. He is presumed innocent.
Touch is already in state custody on gun charges from a Tewksbury police search of his home last month. He is scheduled for his first appearance in federal court in Boston on Monday, November 9.
What prosecutors allege
According to the U.S. Attorney’s Office, as reported by those outlets:
- On September 10, 2026, law enforcement learned of four Instagram accounts with violent and threatening content, including a threat against the president. Investigators concluded Touch was the user of all four.
- On June 21, 2026, Touch allegedly sent a photo of a gun in an Instagram direct message along with the messages “it’s time” and “im gonna kill trump,” and “not yet unc I suck at shooting past 200 yards,” MassLive and WCVB reported.
- Prosecutors say he frequently referred to mass shooters motivated by racist violent extremism as “heroes,” including the shootings in Christchurch, New Zealand, that killed 51 people.
- A search of his home turned up a revolver-style firearm, camouflage clothing, a ballistic helmet, military-style knives and a hatchet.
- Boston 25, WCVB and NBC10 reported that the messages also threatened a school shooting. The federal charge announced Thursday is the threat against the president.
“Threatening the President of the United States is a serious crime and is not protected free speech,” U.S. Attorney Leah B. Foley said. Ted E. Docks, special agent in charge of the FBI’s Boston Division, called Touch “an alleged white supremacist” who “allegedly had the means to do it.”
NBC10 said it reached out to a lawyer listed for Touch in state court records. No outlet reported a response.
The state case
Tewksbury police said an investigation into violent threats online led to a court-authorized search of Touch’s home on Grasshopper Lane, where they found a revolver-style handgun, NBC10 reported. He was arraigned in Lowell District Court on charges of possessing a firearm and ammunition without a firearms identification card and improperly storing a firearm, WCVB reported. He was held on $50,000 cash bail and ordered not to possess firearms. His next state court date is November 17, according to court records cited by NBC10.
Tewksbury Police Chief Ryan Columbus credited the FBI. “Their work may have prevented a mass casualty incident and saved lives,” he said, according to WCVB.
The federal law
The charge is 18 U.S.C. § 871, which we read at Cornell’s Legal Information Institute. It applies to anyone who “knowingly and willfully” mails a threat “to take the life of, to kidnap, or to inflict bodily harm upon the President,” or who “knowingly and willfully otherwise makes any such threat.” The maximum is five years in prison. Prosecutors said the charge also carries up to three years of supervised release and a fine of up to $250,000. Any sentence after a conviction would be set by a judge, who must consider the federal sentencing guidelines.
When words become a crime
The First Amendment protects a great deal of ugly speech about presidents. It does not protect “true threats.” Two Supreme Court cases, both verified on CourtListener, set the boundaries.
Watts v. United States, 394 U.S. 705 (1969). An 18-year-old at a 1966 antiwar rally said that if he were drafted, “the first man I want to get in my sights is L. B. J.” The Court reversed his conviction under the same presidential threat statute. It held the government must first prove a true “threat,” and that “political hyperbole” does not qualify. The Court pointed to “the expressly conditional nature of the statement and the reaction of the listeners,” who laughed.
Counterman v. Colorado, 600 U.S. 66 (2023). The Court held that in true threats cases the government must prove “the defendant had some subjective understanding of his statements’ threatening nature,” but that the First Amendment “requires no more demanding a showing than recklessness.” In other words, it is not enough that a reasonable person would find the words threatening. The prosecution must show the speaker was at least aware of a substantial risk that they would be taken that way.
Those cases frame the questions a court would ask here: whether the June messages, read in context, were serious expressions of intent to commit violence, and what Touch understood about how they would be received. Prosecutors are expected to point to the gun photo, the references to mass shooters and the items found in his home. The defense has not yet responded publicly.
What happens next
A criminal complaint is a charge supported by a sworn affidavit. To take the case to trial on a felony, prosecutors generally must obtain an indictment from a grand jury. At Monday’s initial appearance, a magistrate judge will advise Touch of the charge and address whether he will be detained pending trial. The state gun case proceeds separately in Lowell District Court.
Frequently asked questions
Is threatening the president a federal crime?
Yes. 18 U.S.C. § 871 makes it a felony to knowingly and willfully threaten to kill, kidnap or injure the president, with a maximum of five years in prison.
Is a social media post enough to be charged?
It can be, if it is a “true threat.” Under Counterman v. Colorado (2023), prosecutors must show the speaker at least recklessly disregarded the risk that the statement would be seen as threatening violence. Political hyperbole, as in Watts v. United States (1969), is protected.
Is Trenton Touch in custody?
Yes. He is held on $50,000 cash bail in the state gun case, and he is due in federal court in Boston on November 9, according to WCVB and Boston 25.
Sources: U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Massachusetts announcement, November 5, 2026, as reported by WCVB, Boston 25 News, NBC10 Boston, MassLive and 7News. Tewksbury police and Lowell District Court details from NBC10 Boston and WCVB. 18 U.S.C. § 871, read at Cornell’s Legal Information Institute. Watts v. United States, 394 U.S. 705 (1969), and Counterman v. Colorado, 600 U.S. 66 (2023), verified and read on CourtListener. General information, not legal advice.