Schenck+v.+United+States+(pt.+1)

Background to the Case:
Charles Schenck was the general secretary of the Socialist Party of America. As a socialist of this time period, he believed that the cause of the war lay with the rich people, because it would benefit only them. Thousands of poor and working-class people would die and suffer, especially if they were the soldiers partaking in the actual physical fighting in Europe. Socialists opposed the war themselves, but also urged the general American worker to oppose the war too. Schenck was not the only one who were accused of violating such laws as the Espionage Act, in fact, almost 2,000 people were accused and were put on trial.

=The Case: = During World War I, Charles Schenck printed and sent 15,000 leaflets to draftees telling them not to attend their induction into the army. He believed that the entire draft was spurred by the malicious capitalist system of the age. Because he spoke up against the draft, this caused him to be charged with "conspiracy to violate the Espionage Act by attempting to cause insubordination in military and obstruct recruitment." ( The Oyez Project) The government accused Shenck of attempting to weaken the loyalty of soldiers. When Shenck sent out these leaflets, he did not ask for any violence to occur. Instead, what he called for was for the draftees to petition the repeal of the Conscription Act. He was arrested, tried, convicted, and finally sentenced to prison for violating the Espionage Act of 1917. He appealed his case to the Supreme Court. His case worked its way up through the federal courts and into the Supreme Court. The issue given to the Supreme Court during this case was whether or not his first amendment right had been violated.

The Issues and The Questions:
1. Were Schenck's political statements protected by the freedom of speech stated in the 1st Amendment? 2. What exactly did the statement, "Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech" mean? 3. Were there/Should there be different standards for protected political speech during peacetimes and wartimes? 4. Was the Espionage Act constitutional or was it itself violating the 1st Amendement? 5. Should Schenck remain in prison?

Arguments for Each Side:
//For Schenck//- The Espionage Act is unconstitutional. The 1st Amendment includes the protection of political speech to prevent a "tyranny of the majority." Shenck and the socialists' political statement was the opposition of what they felt was an "immoral war" which was being fought for capitalist purposes.

//For the US//- As a nation in war, the United States has justification in taking steps to defend itself. This case should not be affiliated with the 1st Amendment, just the congressional draft policy. The nation cannot deprive itself of armies and necessary soldiers. What the socialists were encouraging would have meant a danger to the entire nation. At a time of war, the Espionage and Sedition Acts were needed, and Schenck and his fellow thinkers must have the consideration of the safety of the country in mind. []
 * Sources:**