Whether a Hobbs Act robbery conviction can be sustained where the only claimed use of 'violent force' is coughing and claiming to have 'Covid' while shoplifting, when the conduct implicitly threatened encompasses at most indirect force imparted through reckless (rather than intentional) disregard of a risk of transmission

QUESTION PRESENTED The circuit courts have held unanimously that Hobbs Act robbery qualifies categorically as a “violent felony” and “crime of violence.” Therefore, all Hobbs Act robbery offenses must involve the use, attempted use, or threatened use of “violent force,” as defined in, inter alia, Borden v. United States, 141 S. Ct. 1817 (2021), and Stokeling v. United States, 139 S. Ct. 544 (2019). Can a Hobbs Act robbery conviction be sustained where the only claimed use of “violent force” is coughing and claiming to have “Covid” while shoplifting, when the , conduct implicitly threatened encompasses at most indirect force imparted through | reckless (rather than intentional) disregard of a risk of transmission? i INTERESTED PARTIES | There are no