THE 1970S 1969 1979
SUPREME COURT CASE ROE V WADE
|
Question
[CLICK ON ANY CHOICE TO KNOW THE RIGHT ANSWER]
|
|
|
could prejudice a jury.
|
|
|
could cost someone financial gain.
|
|
|
is offensive or obscene.
|
|
|
could create a clear and present danger.
|
Detailed explanation-1: -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-2: -The Court ruled in Schenck v. United States (1919) that speech creating a “clear and present danger” is not protected under the First Amendment. This decision shows how the Supreme Court’s interpretation of the First Amendment sometimes sacrifices individual freedoms in order to preserve social order.
Detailed explanation-3: -In Schenck v. United States, Charles Schenck was charged under the Espionage Act for mailing printed circulars critical of the military draft. Writing for a unanimous Court, Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes upheld Schenck’s conviction and ruled that the Espionage Act did not conflict with the First Amendment.