Whether the Circuits have interpreted the actus reus of Hobbs Act robbery too narrowly and against its plain language by requiring violent physical force as an element

Question Presented for Review By its plain language, Hobbs Act robbery does not require as an element the use, attempted use, or threatened use, of violent physical force. The plain language of the Hobbs Act robbery statute, 18 U.S.C. § 1951(b)(1), encompasses future threats to injure intangible property and does not require violent physical force. The question presented is whether the Circuits have interpreted the actus reus of Hobbs Act robbery too narrowly and against its plain language by requiring violent physical force as an element. 1