Schenck v. United States

E32820

United States Supreme Court case landmark free speech case

Schenck v. United States is a 1919 U.S. Supreme Court case that established the “clear and present danger” test, allowing the government to restrict speech during wartime.

Aliases (5)

Statements (49)

Predicate	Object
instanceOf	United States Supreme Court case → landmark free speech case →
areaOfLaw	constitutional law → criminal law → freedom of speech →
arguedYear	1919 →
category	United States free speech case → World War I era civil liberties case →
citation	249 U.S. 47 →
constitutionalProvision	First Amendment to the United States Constitution →
country	United States →
court	Supreme Court of the United States →
decidedYear	1919 →
decisionDate	1919-03-03 →
defendant	United States →
doctrineEstablished	clear and present danger test →
factSummary	Charles Schenck distributed leaflets urging resistance to the military draft during World War I → Schenck was charged with conspiracy to violate the Espionage Act by attempting to cause insubordination in the military →
famousPhrase	shouting fire in a theatre and causing a panic →
fullName	Schenck v. United States, 249 U.S. 47 (1919) →
historicalContext	World War I →
holding	Conviction under the Espionage Act for distributing anti-draft leaflets during wartime was constitutional → The First Amendment does not protect speech that creates a clear and present danger of a significant evil that Congress has power to prevent →
impact	expanded government power to restrict speech during wartime → influenced later First Amendment jurisprudence →
jurisdiction	federal →
laterCharacterization	often criticized as overly restrictive of free speech →
legalIssue	First Amendment freedom of speech → application of the Espionage Act of 1917 →
lowerCourt	United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania →
lowerCourtOutcome	conviction affirmed →
majorityOpinionBy	Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. →
opinionType	unanimous opinion →
page	47 →
plaintiff	Charles T. Schenck →
precedentStatus	binding precedent at the time of decision →
relatedCase	Abrams v. United States → Brandenburg v. Ohio → Debs v. United States → Gitlow v. New York →
reporter	United States Reports →
standardAnnounced	whether the words used create a clear and present danger that they will bring about substantive evils that Congress has a right to prevent →
statuteInvolved	Espionage Act of 1917 →
subjectMatter	anti-draft advocacy → political speech →
subsequentDevelopment	clear and present danger test later narrowed and modified by subsequent Supreme Court decisions →
timePeriod	World War I era →
volume	249 →
vote	9–0 →

Referenced by (12)

Subject (surface form when different)	Predicate
Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. (""Clear and present danger" doctrine") → Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. ("Schenck v. United States opinion") →	notableWork
Abrams v. United States → Frohwerk v. United States →	relatedCase
Schenck v. United States ("Schenck was charged with conspiracy to violate the Espionage Act by attempting to cause insubordination in the military") →	factSummary
Schenck v. United States ("Schenck v. United States, 249 U.S. 47 (1919)") →	fullName
First Amendment to the United States Constitution →	hasLandmarkCase
Schenck v. United States ("The First Amendment does not protect speech that creates a clear and present danger of a significant evil that Congress has power to prevent") →	holding
Brandenburg v. Ohio →	modifiedPrecedent
Sedition Act of 1918 →	relatedTo
Debs v. United States →	similarToCase
Espionage Act of 1917 →	usedInCase