USA HISTORY

Previous
Next

AMERICAN IMPERIALISM 1890 1919

THE UNITED STATES IN WORLD WAR I

Question [CLICK ON ANY CHOICE TO KNOW THE RIGHT ANSWER]
The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting fire in a theatre and causing a panic ____ 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.-Oliver Wendell Holmes, Schenck v. United States In Schenck v. United States, what evidence did the Supreme Court use to determine a “clear and present danger”?
A
the presence of Japanese Americans on the WestCoast
B
the mailing of pamphlets advising young men toresist the draft
C
demonstrations in which protestors burn the American flag
D
newspaper articles criticizing U.S. entry intoWorld War I
Explanation: 

Detailed explanation-1: -The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting fire in a theatre and causing a panic. It does not even protect a man from an injunction against uttering words that may have all the effect of force. Gompers v. Buck’s Stove & Range Co., 221 U. S. 418, 439, 31 Sup.

Detailed explanation-2: -Under a strict scrutiny analysis, a law that restricts freedom of speech must achieve a compelling government interest and be narrowly tailored to that interest or be the least speech-restrictive means available to the government. Strict scrutiny also is used when a law targets a specific religious faith.

Detailed explanation-3: -United States, 249 U.S. 47 (1919) If speech is intended to result in a crime, and there is a clear and present danger that it actually will result in a crime, the First Amendment does not protect the speaker from government action.

Detailed explanation-4: -"Shouting fire in a crowded theater” is a popular analogy for speech or actions whose principal purpose is to create panic, and in particular for speech or actions which may for that reason be thought to be outside the scope of free speech protections.

Detailed explanation-5: -What was Schenck’s major argument? Any law, such as the Espionage Act, that prevents opposition to the draft by peaceful means is a violation of the First Amendment freedom of speech and press.

There is 1 question to complete.
Previous
Next