WWI-DaBeach

= Analyzing __//Supreme Court //__ Cases =

Can Government Limit Free Speech?
In the fall of 1917, Charles Schenck mailed pamphlets to draftees telling them the draft was wrong and urging them to write protest letters. In August 1918, Jacob Abrams wrote pamphlets denouncing the war and criticizing the decision to send troops to Russia to fight communist forces. Both men were convicted of violating the Espionage Act. Both appealed their convictions all the way to the Supreme Court.

The Court's Opinion //"The most stringent protection would not protect a man in falsely shouting fire in a theatre and causing a panic.... The question in every case is whether the words used are used in such circumstances and are of such a nature as to create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantial evils that Congress has the right to prevent. It is a question of proximity and degree. When a nation is at war, many things that may be said in a time of peace are such a hindrance to its efforts that their utterance will not be endured so long as men fight, and that no Court could regard them as protected by any constitutional right."// - Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes writing for the Court in Schenck vs. U.S.

The Schenck and Abrams cases raised the question: Are there some circumstances in which the First Amendment's protection of free speech no longer applies? In both cases, the Supreme Court upheld the Espionage Act, concluding that under certain circumstances, the government can indeed limit free speech. In the Schenck case, the Supreme Court decision was unanimous, but in the Abrams case, the Court split 7-2 in their decision.