Your monthly support provides voters the knowledge they need to make confident decisions at the polls. Donate today.
Schenck v. United States
 | |
| Schenck v. United States | |
| Reference: 249 US 47 | |
| Term: 1919 | |
| Important Dates | |
| Argued: January 9-10, 1919 Decided: March 3, 1919 | |
| Outcome | |
| United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania affirmed | |
| Majority | |
| Edward Douglass White • Joseph McKenna • Oliver Holmes • William R. Day • Willis Van Devanter • Mahlon Pitney • James C. McReynolds • Louis Brandeis • John Clarke | |
Schenck v. United States was a case decided on March 3, 1919, by the United States Supreme Court holding that the Espionage Act, which aimed to quell insubordination in the military and obstruction to recruitment, did not violate the First Amendment. The unanimous court found that the First Amendment right to free speech is not protected if it invokes a clear and present danger. The court affirmed the decision of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.[1][2]
Why it matters: The Supreme Court's decision found that the Espionage Act of 1917 did not violate the right to free speech outlined in the First Amendment. The case established the precedent that the right to free speech is not protected if it presents a clear and present danger. To read more about the impact of Schenck v. United States click here.
Background
During World War I, Charles Schenck and Elizabeth Baer were members of the Socialist political party. They distributed leaflets claiming that the Selective Service Act of 1917 violated the Thirteenth Amendment by forcing men to involuntarily serve in the United States military. The purpose of the leaflets was to persuade the general public to disobey the draft, albeit using only nonviolent measures. Charles Schenck and Elizabeth Baer were then arrested on conspiracy to violate the Espionage Act of 1917 by attempting to create insubordination within the military and to impede the government's military recruitment process. Schenck and Baer appealed their conviction on the grounds that the statute violated the First Amendment right to free speech.
A jury in a Pennsylvania court found that Schenck and Baer violated the Espionage Act of 1917 by conspiring to create insubordination within the military. The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania affirmed the decision. Schenck and Baer appealed their conviction on the grounds that Congress violated the First Amendment right to free speech.[2]
Oral argument
Oral arguments were held between January 9-10, 1919. The case was decided on March 3, 1919.[1]
Decision
The Supreme Court decided unanimously to affirm the decision of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes delivered the opinion of the court.[2]
Opinions
Opinion of the court
Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, writing for the court, argued that the actions of Charles Schenck posed a clear and present danger to the U.S. military by conspiring to obstruct the draft's recruitment process:[2]
| “ | 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 substantive evils that Congress has a right to prevent. It is a question of proximity and degree. When a nation is at war, many things that might be said in time of peace are such a hindrance to its effort 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. It seems to be admitted that, if an actual obstruction of the recruiting service were proved, liability for words that produced that effect might be enforced. The statute of 1917, in § 4, punishes conspiracies to obstruct, as well as actual obstruction.[3] | ” |
| —Oliver Wendell Holmes, majority opinion in Schenck v. United States[2] | ||
Impact
| Federalism |
|---|
|
| •Key terms • Court cases •Major arguments • State responses to federal mandates • Federalism by the numbers • Index of articles about federalism |
Schenck v. United States held that the Espionage Act of 1917 did not violate the First Amendment right to free speech. The case established the standard commonly referred to as the clear and present danger test, in which speech inciting an obvious threat to safety is not protected under the First Amendment.[1][2]
See also
External links
- Full text of case syllabus and opinions (Justia)
- Supreme Court of the United States
- Search Google News for this topic
Footnotes
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 Oyez, "Schenck v. United States," accessed August 8, 2022
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 Justia, "Schenck v. United States, 249 U.S. 47 (1919)," accessed August 8, 2022
- ↑ Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
| ||||||||||||||||||||
