Schenck v. United States

Schenck v. United States, Supreme Court, 1919

Facts of the Case

During World War I, Charles Schenck, the General Secretary of the Socialist Party, distributed leaflets urging resistance to the draft. The leaflets argued that the draft violated the Thirteenth Amendment’s prohibition against involuntary servitude and encouraged draftees to petition for the repeal of the draft. Schenck was charged with conspiracy to violate the Espionage Act of 1917 by attempting to cause insubordination in the military and obstruct recruitment. Schenck argued that his conviction violated his First Amendment right to free speech.

Constitutional Question

Did Schenck’s conviction under the Espionage Act for criticizing the draft violate his First Amendment right to freedom of speech?

Arguments

For Schenck:

  • The distribution of leaflets was an exercise of his First Amendment right to free speech.
  • The Espionage Act was overly broad and vague, infringing upon constitutional protections.
  • Peaceful advocacy against the draft did not pose a clear and present danger to national security.

For the United States:

  • The leaflets posed a clear and present danger to the nation’s ability to recruit and maintain armed forces during wartime.
  • The government has the authority to restrict speech that threatens national security, especially during times of war.
  • Schenck’s actions were intended to obstruct the draft and undermine the war effort.

The Decision

The Supreme Court, in a unanimous decision written by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., upheld Schenck’s conviction. The Court held that the Espionage Act did not violate the First Amendment and that Schenck’s actions were not protected by the freedom of speech. Justice Holmes introduced the “clear and present danger” test, stating that the government could restrict speech if it posed a clear and present danger of causing significant harm that the government has the right to prevent. The famous analogy used by Holmes was that the First Amendment does not protect a person who falsely shouts “fire” in a crowded theater and causes panic.

Significance

Schenck v. United States established the “clear and present danger” test, which became a foundational principle for evaluating the limits of free speech under the First Amendment. The decision marked a significant moment in the balance between individual rights and national security, particularly during times of war. Although later decisions would refine and sometimes narrow the “clear and present danger” test, Schenck remains a key case in the history of First Amendment jurisprudence, illustrating the circumstances under which speech can be limited in the interest of national security.