How does the clear and present danger test operate, and what is its current relevance to the restriction of speech in the United States?
What will be an ideal response?
An ideal response will:
1, Discuss how Justice Holmes argued that government could only restrict speech that presented a "clear and present danger."
2, Explain how the meaning of the clear and present danger language was debated in the years that followed and that Holmes himself argued that the Court had interpreted it too broadly.
3, Note that the clear and present danger test was modified and essentially replaced by the imminent lawless action standard from Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969).
You might also like to view...
________ are laws authorizing grants of government funds to qualifying candidates for elective office, to be used in their campaigns
A. Disclosure laws B. Election regulation laws C. Contribution limits D. Public financing laws E. Candidate expenditure laws
Appellate courts are different from trial courts because they a. always have a jury present. b. openly publish the dissent that arises over the lower-court findings. c. do not require the presence of the plaintiff, defendants, or witnesses, and their trials are based on lower-courtrecords
d. always have two judges who make the final decision on the outcomes of appeals.