Charles Schenck was the Secretary of the Socialist Party (I found it interesting to learn that the US actually had a socialist party at one point) and was in charge of sending potential draftees pamphlets. These pamphlets were actually not pro-draft pamphlets. I found out that they were actually encouraging draftees to stand up against the draft. In these pamphlets he was saying things like "In lending tacit or silent consent to the conscription law, in neglecting to assert your rights, you are (whether knowingly or not) helping to condone and support a most infamous and insidious conspiracy to abridge and destroy the sacred and cherished rights of a free people." The comments in the pamphlets was what got Schenck in trouble with the Supreme Court.
This was an extremely public and much talked about case. It was very difficult trying to find a newspaper article on the subject but the New York Times had an article about the case on March 4, 1919. This article was basically just keeping the public informed about what was going on in the case and who was being charged with what. No one could just look on their iPhone and see how the case was going back then so this was the way the public got to hear about the national news of the time.
propaganda poster
I found an excellent book on AVL called Great American Trials In Schenck's indictment he was no evidence was there to prove that he had "corrupted" any single soldier. However the court thought that the publication of the pamphlets its self was enough to say he was guilty. Schenck's defense simply argued that this was completely against the First Amendment. However, he was found guilty so he appealed the court's decision. Justice Oliver Holmes said that if it had been peace time when this case had been brought up he would have been innocent but since it was war time he was found guilty. I thought that was the most ridiculous thing ever! I just could not believe that you could change a law to be different war time and peace.
The most important thing I found about this case was the "clear and present danger". During the trial Justice Holmes said "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." Basically this means that if what Schenck was trying to tell people was seriously detrimental to the United States, Congress had the right to punish him for what he was saying. So the court had to judge whether or not something was a "clear and present danger" to the war efforts of the time.
In my research I found that this was an incredibly unconstitutional trial. Schenck should have never been sentenced to six months in prison for what he did. It is completely within his rights of the First Amendment as a US citizen. I sincerely hope that nothing like this ever happens again in our courts of law. I think this all happened because Americans were scared about going into such a massive war and they were just trying to protect the nation that they so dearly loved.
Chief Justices at the time
