 | Spencer Tucker, Laura Matysek Wood, Justin D. Murphy - 1999 - 820 pages
...rationalized these laws by stating that "when a nation is at war, many things that might be said in times of peace are such a hindrance to its effort that their...utterance will not be endured so long as men fight." С Clearly, the national governments of the belligerents perceived free speech to be a possible deterrent... | |
 | Brett Gary - 1999 - 348 pages
...therefore failed to restrict punishable offenses to actual overt acts only. In Schenck the Court had said "when a nation is at war many things that might be said in time of peace are such a hindrance . . . that their utterance will not be endured." In other words, "mere words" could be construed as... | |
 | Donald E. Lively - 1999 - 396 pages
...Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., in Schenck v. United States (1919), observed that during wartime "many things that might be said in time of peace are such a hindrance to [the nation's] effort that their utterance will not be endured so long as men fight and that no Court... | |
 | Madeleine Mercedes Plasencia - 1999 - 378 pages
...Act of 1917, First Amendment concerns were secondary to issues of criminal conduct. Holmes states: "When a nation is at war many things that might be said in the time of peace aare such a hindrance to its effort that their utterance will not be endured so long... | |
 | Richard M Battistoni - 2000 - 198 pages
...restraint is not absolutely unlimited. But the limitation has been recognized only in exceptional cases: When a nation is at war, many things that might be...regard them as protected by any constitutional right. Schenck v. United States, 249 US 47. No one would question but that a government might prevent actual... | |
 | Maxwell Bloomfield - 2000 - 236 pages
...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...could regard them as protected by any constitutional right.37 The Justice Department zealously enforced both statutes, launching nearly two thousand prosecutions... | |
 | Michael Kent Curtis - 2000 - 544 pages
...the substantive evils that Congress has a right to prevent. It is a question of proximity and degree. When a nation is at war many things that might be...their utterance will not be endured so long as men fight.21 As a result of the decision in Schenck and similar cases, legislatures could ban wartime political... | |
 | Terry Eastland - 2000 - 438 pages
...prevent. It is a question of proximity and degree. When a nation is at war many things that might he said in time of peace are such a hindrance to its effort that their utterance will not he endured so long as men fight and that no Court could regard them as protected by any constitutional... | |
 | Terry Eastland - 2000 - 446 pages
...the substantive evils that Congress has a right to prevent. It is a question of proximity and degree. When a nation is at war, many things that might be said in times of peace are such a hindrance to its effort that their utterance will not be endured so long... | |
 | Adam R. Nelson - 2009 - 437 pages
...the substantive evils that Congress has a right to prevent. It is a question of proximity and degree. When a nation is at war, many things that might be...regard them as protected by any constitutional right." 13 According to Holmes, Congress had a legitimate right to suppress subversive speech if it threatened... | |
| |
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. 
