Embedded Files
Short Summary: During World War I, a pair of socialists, including Charles Schenck distributed leaflets that stated the draft violated the 13th Amendment - which prohibits involuntary servitude. The leaflet wanted people to disobey the draft. Schenck was charged with violating the Espionage Act of 1917. They appealed on the grounds of the First Amendment.
Constitutional Issue: This was a First Amendment case and the question was whether the Espionage Act violated the First Amendment and if it was an appropriate way that Congress exercised its wartime authority.
Holding and Constitutional Principle: The Supreme Court held that the Espionage Act did not violate the First Amendment and it was an appropriate exercise of Congress’ wartime authority. This was a key limitation on the First Amendment as the free speech clause does not allow for advocacy of unlawful behavior. Established "clear and present danger" test for evaluating restrictions on free speech.
How did the balance of power between national and state governments change based on interpretations in Schenck v. the United States?
Strengthened the authority of the federal government relative to the states, particularly in the context of free speech and the limitations of individuals' rights during times of war. The decision expanded federal authority to restrict speech that presents a clear and present danger to national security, even if such restrictions limit individual liberties protected by the First Amendment. Also, the decision limited state powers by establishing that federal law can override state laws and state-level protections of free speech.
Page updated
Google Sites
Report abuse