Question

Quiz Active

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
TIME REMAINING
54:47
Though the outcomes of Schenck and New York Times differed, what did these decisions have in common?
The government has a heavy burden to prove harm.
The government can limit speech that causes harm.
The government has unlimited power to limit speech.
The government must follow the First Amendment.

Answer 1

The decisions of Schenck and New York Times had in common that the government can limit speech that causes harm. However, the outcomes differed in terms of the level of harm required to restrict speech.

Step-by-step explanation:

The subject of this question is Law.

The decisions of Schenck and New York Times had in common that the government can limit speech that causes harm. In both cases, the courts ruled that the government has the power to restrict speech that presents a clear and present danger or poses a threat to national security. However, the outcomes differed in terms of the level of harm required to restrict speech. In Schenck, the court established the clear and present danger test, which requires a direct and immediate threat, while in New York Times, the court raised the bar to actual malice for defamation cases.

Therefore, the main similarity between the decisions is that the government can limit speech that causes harm, as long as it meets the legal standards set by the court.

Learn more about Government’s power to limit speech