The Court held that in calling for a general strike and the curtailment of munitions production, the leaflets violated the Espionage Act.

Abrams v. United States: The First Amendment does not protect speech that is designed to undermine the United States in war by fueling sedition and ...

The Supreme Court upheld the convictions under the clear and present danger standard, which allowed the suppression of certain types of speech in the public ... Background · Opinion of the court · Holmes's dissent

The Supreme Court upheld these convictions—applying the “clear and present danger” test from Schenck v. United States, decided earlier that same year. Justice ...

The Supreme Court deferred to Congress again and upheld the convictions. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes (joined by Justice Louis Brandeis) dissented, arguing the ...

1 янв. 2009 г. · In Abrams v. United States (1919), the Supreme Court upheld convictions of Russian immigrants who had distributed anti-government leaflets.

Abrams and four others (plaintiffs) were convicted of conspiring to violate the Espionage Act of 1917 (EA), as amended in 1918.

Each of the first three counts charged the defendants with conspiring, when the United States was at war with the Imperial Government of Germany, to unlawfully.

The Supreme Court upheld the convictions, concluding that the federal government could constitutionally restrict speech that posed a clear and present danger ... Не найдено: outcome | Нужно включить: outcome