In what way(s) is the clear and present danger test for political speech valid today? How can it be applied in a post-9/11 age with increasing access to high-tech communication devices?
What will be an ideal response?
Students should discuss the need to protect political speech as compared to the need to affirm and protect national security. Devices like cell phones, computers, and Inter-net devices make it very difficult to monitor who is “yelling fire in a crowded theater,” yet this standard for public safety is still important. Students may discuss the cases of Schenck or others and compare these situations to today’s political and technological environment.
[STUDENT ANSWERS WILL VARY.]
You might also like to view...
Advertisements that urge citizens to take action on a issue is:
a) FEC b) Issue advocacy advertisements( Buckley v. Valeo) c) Section 527 group
In the FAA-McDonnell Douglas DC-10 case, the author implies or asserts that ________
a. the FAA immediately fixed the cargo door b. McDonnell Douglas eventually complied with the FAA's order to strengthen cargo doors and cabin floors c. the Canadian government was at fault for the cargo door problem d. the FAA was guilty of political favoritism and weak supervision toward McDonnell Douglas e. it was a personal loss for the author, and the government was not to blame for the accident