Heimlich History: Schenck v. United States

Introduction

• Supreme Court case relevant for AP Government curriculum.
• Focus: Schenck v. United States.
• Context: World War I era and the Espionage Act.

Facts of the Case

• Espionage Act (1917): Outlawed hindrances to military recruitment.
• Charles Schenck: Member of the Socialist Party in Philadelphia.
  • Opposed World War I military draft.
  • Distributed pamphlets encouraging men to resist the draft.
  • Pamphlet claimed draft was involuntary servitude, violating the 13th Amendment.
• Legal Proceedings:
  • Schenck arrested for violating Espionage Act.
  • Case appealed to Supreme Court.

Constitutional Principle

• First Amendment Right: Schenck argued his right to free speech was violated.
• Government's Argument: His actions were a threat to military recruitment efforts.

Supreme Court Decision

• Unanimous Ruling: Schenck's First Amendment rights were not violated.
• Reasoning:
  • Schenck actively encouraged draft resistance, not merely protested.
  • Actions posed a "clear and present danger."
  • Oliver Wendell Holmes' opinion: compared to "falsely shouting fire in a theater."

Impact and Significance

• Clear and Present Danger Test:
  • Established a benchmark for distinguishing protected vs. unprotected speech.
  • During wartime, government can restrict speech that hinders efforts.
• Evolution of Legal Tests:
  • Clear and present danger is now obsolete.
  • Superseded by the Brandenburg Test.
  • Brandenburg Test: Considers intent and likelihood to incite lawless action.
  • Sets a higher bar for government to restrict speech.

Conclusion

• Schenck v. United States is a landmark case for free speech jurisprudence.
• Understanding the evolution from "clear and present danger" to the "Brandenburg Test" is crucial for AP Government students.
• Encouragement to review additional materials for further study.