Schenck v. United States | BRI’s Homework Help Series
Schenck v. United States was a Supreme Court Case that explained some limits to the Freedom of Speech afforded by the First Amendment. During World War I, the US instituted a military draft. Many people released anti-war and anti-government information due to their displeasure with the draft. Charles Schenck, an anti-war socialist, was arrested by the Federal Government for circulating a pamphlet encouraging men to resist the draft and violating the Espionage Act of 1917. The Supreme Court ruled that wartime circumstances changed the rules related to free speech and resulted in the “Clear and Present Danger” rule.
0:02 Just how far does an individual’s right to free speech extend? The 1919 court case of Schenck vs. the United States was central in defining some of the limitations of free speech rights. You see, during World War, the US. Instituted a military draft in which 24 million men registered and two 5 million were actually drafted into the military.
0:23 This generated outrage from certain antiwar groups, such as socialists, anarchists and peace advocates. Now, President Woodrow Wilson was not a fan of the demonstrations or antiwar literature that some of these groups were generating. Wilson said, such creatures of passion, disloyalty and anarchy must be crushed out. One such protester was Charles Schenck.
0:45 He was a member of the Socialist Party and was responsible for distributing a leaflet urging recently drafted men to resist the draft. This pamphlet asserted that the draft violated the 13th Amendment, which prohibited involuntary servitude or slavery. He also condemned the federal government and the war. The federal government then arrested Schenck and charged him with violating the Espionage Act of 1917,
1:09 which made it a crime to obstruct the recruiting or enlistment service. Schenck maintained that the First Amendment’s free speech clause protected his right to criticize the government. The Supreme Court took up the question. Unfortunately for Charles Schenck, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously against him. They argued that wartime circumstances changed the rules related to the right of free speech.
1:30 The Court, in an opinion written by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. aaid, we admit that in many places and in ordinary times, the defendants, in saying all that was said in the circular, would have been within their constitutional rights. But the character of every act depends on the circumstances in which it is done. The Court also created the Clear
1:51 and Present Danger Rule, a new test for free speech. The Court decided. 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 when a nation is at war. Many things that might be set in time of peace are such a hindrance to its
2:14 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. From saying bomb on an airplane to yelling fire in a crowded theater, Schenck versus the United States is still applicable today. Clear and Present Danger would guide free speech conversations until the 1969 case of Brandenburg vs.
2:37 Ohio clarified it further, bringing us imminent lawless action. This would define suppressed speech as speech that incites the imminent and likely violation of the law. But that’s a story for another time. For more information on this and many other important court cases throughout history, be sure to check out the other videos in our Homework Help series.
2:57 Please don’t hesitate to hit the like button below and make sure to subscribe for future Homework Help videos.