Free Speech
Audrey Miciano
10/26/10
Government
Legislative Action
identify the impact it had on freedom of speech; especially identify any "speech" that it
limited.
Espionage Act 1917
The Espionage Act of 1917 was adopted during World War I to restrict
Americans from committing acts of espionage or criticizing the government. This
impacted freedom of speech specifically towards the government because it was being
limited by this act. Americans were not able to protest the war or the government’s
decisions regarding the war because it was seen as unsupportive of America and therefore
questionable of loyalty. Furthermore, Americans were very restricted in being of
possession of or having knowledge of anything that related to the war or America’s
enemies during the war. This was very restricting on citizen’s right to even discuss the
war.
Court cases
For each of the following Court cases do the following:
 Briefly summarize the facts of the case
 Explain the courts decision
 identify the impact it had on freedom of speech; especially identify any "speech"
that it limited
Schenck v United States (1919)
Schenck was charged with conspiracy to violate the Espionage Act for mailing
circulars to drafters, which suggested that the draft for World War I was wrong. The
court concluded that Schenck was not protected under the First Amendment and so he
was punished. The court ruled that peech that is tolerable in peacetime is punishable in
wartime.
As outlined above in the Espionage act, the freedom of speech was limited
because Schenck could not express his opinions against the draft for the war. He was not
allowed to persuade others to go against the draft either, which prohibits him from taking
action against something that he disagrees with. This strongly limited Schenck from
expressing his opinion about the draft.
Gitlow v New York (1925)
Gitlow was arrested for distributing copies of a “left-wing manifesto” that called
to establish socialism through strikes and class action of any form. Gitlow was tried and
argued that no harmful action resulted from his actions, but the court ruled that anyone
who advocated the doctrine of violent revolution violated the law.
This court case affected freedom of speech because the legislature may decide
that an entire class of speech is so dangerous that it should be prohibited. This limits the
freedom of speech because even if the form of speech causes no danger at all, the person
can still be convicted and punished.