Question

Document D: Schenck v. United States (Modified) The excerpt below comes from the Supreme Court’s unanimous opinion in Schenck v. United States, 1919 OPINION BY JUSTICE OLIVER WENDELL HOLMES, JR. The character of every act depends upon the circumstances in which it is done. The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting "Fire!" in a theatre and causing a panic. . . . The question in every case is whether the words used are used in such circumstances and are of such a nature as to create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantive evils that Congress has a right to prevent. . . . When a nation is at war many things that might be said in time of peace are such a hindrance to its effort that their utterance will not be endured so long as men fight and that no Court could regard them as protected by any constitutional right. Source: Supreme Court opinion by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., March 3, 1919 What do you predict Debs or Schenck will say in this document?

Answer 1

Charles Schenck and Eugene Debs, both socialists prosecuted under the Espionage Act of 1917 during World War I, would likely argue in this document for their First Amendment rights to free speech, even during wartime.

Step-by-step explanation:

The Schenck v. United States case was decided by the Supreme Court in 1919, during World War I. Given the passage's content, this question seems to be asking what either person (Debs or Schenck) might assert within the document. Charles Schenck, the Secretary of the Socialist Party of America, was prosecuted under the Espionage Act of 1917 for distributing leaflets opposing the draft. He likely would state that his actions were an exercise of his First Amendment rights to free speech. Eugene Debs, also a prominent socialist, would likely echo these sentiments, as he was similarly prosecuted for a speech over objections to the war. Both Debs and Schenck would likely argue against the limitation of free speech, even during wartime.

Learn more about Schenck v. United States