 | Leon Newton - 2006 - 320 pages
...wartime, in his view, national security concerns would take precedence over First Amendment rights. "When a nation is at war many things that might be...utterance will not be endured so long as men fight." The media have long accepted their unwritten duty to self-censor in times of out-andout war, fearing... | |
 | Peter Irons - 2006 - 328 pages
...leaflets, which never reached the post office. There is another troubling statement in the Schenck opinion: "When a nation is at war many things that might be said in time of peace are such a hindrance to its conduct that their utterance will not be endured so long as men fight and that no Court could regard... | |
 | Kermit L. Hall, John J. Patrick - 2006 - 257 pages
...draft during a time of war presents a "clear and present danger" to the nation. Thus Holmes declared, "When a nation is at war, many things that might be...said in time of peace are such a hindrance to its efforts that their utterance will not be protected by any constitutional right." Before the Schenck... | |
 | Mark Sidel - 2007 - 252 pages
...circumstances are justified "[wjhen a nation is at war [because] many things that might be said in times of peace are such a hindrance to its effort that their utterance will not be endured."' The Sedition Act of 1918 continued this treatment. Forced detentions were an issue once again in the... | |
 | David A. Copeland - 2006 - 313 pages
...justices said that Schenck's actions created a "clear and present danger." According to majority opinion: "When a nation is at war many things that might be said in a time of peace are such a hindrance to its effort that their utterance will not be endured so long... | |
 | Earl Shorris - 2007 - 396 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." War has often been an excuse for tossing the Constitution aside, but the definition of war has become... | |
 | Jeffrey D. Stocks - 2007 - 114 pages
...speech. The decision was unanimous and its opinion was written by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. "[w]hen a nation is at war many things that might...regard them as protected by any constitutional right" (Scbenck v. US [1919]). Holmes also set forth his famous "clear and present danger" threshold. He stated... | |
 | Scott J. Hammond, Kevin R. Hardwick, Howard Leslie Lubert - 2007 - 988 pages
...the substantive evils that Congress has a right to prevent. It is a question of proximity and degree. panting fugitive as he was tracking his way to Canada. And every man or woman in whose veins coursed It seems to be admitted that if an actual obstruction of the recruiting service were proved, liability... | |
 | Paul Siegel - 2008 - 336 pages
...rights might be tolerated and a prior restraint on publication might be appropriate. The Court stated: "When a nation is at war many things that might be...regard them as protected by any constitutional right. No one would question but that a government might prevent actual obstruction to its recruiting service... | |
 | Jeffrey Rosen - 2007 - 288 pages
...Holmes offered them as a justification for suppressing free speech. In the next breath, he declared: "When a nation is at war many things that might be...regard them as protected by any constitutional right." Once again, Holmes could not resist the military references. But Holmes's civil libertarian friends... | |
| |
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. 
