On Feb. 26, 18-year-old Hope Duncan was arrested by MSU Police after she posted on the MSU 2028 Snapchat story stating, "Theres going to be another shooting at michigan state."

"I’m so glad, this school deserves it and everyone here should die," the post said. 

Duncan was charged with one count of making a false report or threat of terrorism and one count of using a computer to commit a crime, each carrying a 20-year sentence.

On April 1, judge Lisa Babcock ruled that the case will proceed to trial, despite defense attorney Mike Nichols’ request to have the charges dismissed. 

Nichols' argument has centered on the legitimacy of the law Duncan is charged with breaking. In February, a Michigan Court of Appeals ruling deemed the law criminalizing terrorist threats or false reports of terrorism to be unconstitutional due to issues of free speech and what requirements must be met for speech to be considered a threat. 

However, that ruling was vacated by the Michigan Supreme Court on March 28. The court's decision means the prosecution in Duncan's case can move forward. 

Despite the latest ruling, Nichols still argues that Duncan's charges should be dismissed under the earlier Court of Appeals ruling. He emphasized that the Court of Appeals is still a lower court, suggesting that its reasoning should still be considered in Duncan’s defense. 

"Really, nothing has changed because the Supreme Court order did not declare the statute constitutional, it just told the lower courts to go back and review the arguments and the prior decision," he told The State News. "In the meantime, the statute still has binding effects on trial courts, so other people can still be prosecuted for it."

Additionally, Nichols maintains that the statute remains unconstitutional. 

"I don’t think that the statute is valid because it covers too much speech that’s perfectly legal," Nichols said. "We protect speech, even if it may be false. Distasteful speech that we don’t like? That’s what the First Amendment is for."

Aside from the debate over law, the case has been polarizing among MSU community members for other reasons. One of the focal points of Duncan's preliminary hearing on March 20 was her mental health. 

"It’s polarizing because we still have a completely inept approach to mental health in the United States of America, and a lot of people refuse to acknowledge it," Nichols said. 

At this time, it is unclear what the date of Duncan’s next scheduled court appearance will be, as well as who the 30th Circuit Court judge will be.