data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/fc037/fc0375dc5a2c7edde3ee76183f2ab048c01e2f40" alt="" |
Judge Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. |
In the
Schenck v. United States case, Schenck sent a paper he wrote to draftees in which he articulated his belief that the draft was wrong, urging the draftees "not to submit to intimidation." He was charged with conspiracy to violate the Espionage Act (law stating it was a crime to mail or print information that inspires a movement against the war effort or promoted enemies), since he encouraged insubordination in the military, and tried to reduce the amount of people in the military (this was the "movement against the war effort" he inspired). Justice Holmes concluded that Schenck is not protected, and his words created a "clear and present danger . . . that Congress [had] a right to prevent. He also said that words that may be tolerable in peacetime can be punished during wartime, since they cause an increased threat in these times - in other words, in wartime, there can be a greater restriction of free speech since there are greater dangers that could happen. In the court's eyes, Schenck's words created a dangerous situation for the US since he discouraged war and tried to weakened the military, so Congress had the right to prevent him from doing so.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/3804b/3804b345752fd8087373d4bb0a086742802d5f8c" alt="" |
John Peter Zenger |
This trial is similar to the John Peter Zenger trial since like Schenck, Zenger was trialed for speaking out against the government. Zenger inspired the free speech that Schenck believed he was protected by, however Zenger was acquitted while Schenck was convicted.