Free Speech and its Dangers

Question 1

Schenck v. U.S

Answer 1

During World War I, Schenck mailed circulars to draftees. The circulars suggested that the draft was a monstrous wrong motivated by the capitalist system. Advised peaceful action. Schenck was charged with conspiracy to violate the Espionage Act.

Question: Are Schenck’s actions (words, expression) protected by the free speech clause of the First Amendment?

Court: No. During wartime, utterances tolerable in peacetime can be punished.

Question 2

Abrams v. U.S

Answer 2

The defendants were convicted on the basis of two leaflets they printed and threw from windows of a building. They were against invasion of Russia. The defendants were charged and convicted for inciting resistance to the war effort.

Question: Violation of free speech?

Court: No. The leaflets are an appeal to violent revolution. “Bad tendency”.

Question 3

Gitlow v. New York

Answer 3

Gitlow, a socialist, was arrested for distributing copies of a “left-wing manifesto”.

Question: Is the New York law punishing advocacy to overthrow the government by force an unconstitutional violation of the free speech clause of the First Amendment?

Court: “dangerous tendency” test. If Speech can lead to decent it can be enforced.

Question 4

Dennis v. US

Answer 4

Leaders of communist party of America arrested and charged with violation of smith act. Made it unlawful to knowingly conspire to overthrow the government.

Question: Did the Smith Act’s restrictions on speech violate the First Amendment?

Court: Upheld the convictions of the Communist Party leaders and found that the Smith Act did not “inherently” violate the First Amendment. Advocacy created a “clear and present danger” that threatened the government.

Question 5

Brandenburg v. Ohio

Answer 5

leader in the Ku Klux Klan, made a speech at a Klan rally and was later convicted under an Ohio criminal syndicalism law. For advocating “crime, sabotage, violence, or unlawful methods of terrorism.

Question: Did Ohio’s criminal syndicalism law violate free speech?

Court: Yes. (1) speech can be prohibited if it is “directed at inciting or producing imminent lawless action” and (2) it is “likely to incite or produce such action.” No plan was in place for this action.

Question 6

Thomas v. Collins

Answer 6

A Texas law required union officials to obtain an organizer’s card before soliciting possible members. A judge convicted a labor organizer of contempt for speaking at a union rally without a permit.

Question: Does the Texas law requiring labor organizers to secure permission to solicit members violate the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment?

Court: Yes, the law was unconstitutional. It interfered with freedom of speech.