LAD#26 - Schenck vs. US

In the case of Schenck versus the United States on March 3, 1919, it was concluded that enough sufficient evidence was obtained to connect the defendant with the mailing of printed circulars that conspired to obstruct the recruiting and enlistment service of the Espionage Act of June 1917. Though words would usually be within the freedom of speech under the First Amendment, it becomes subject to prohibition in certain circumstances such as war. The conspiracy wanted to influence men who had been drafted to obstruct the draft of the Selective Service Act of May 18, 1917. Thus the circulation of such pamphlets was punishable under the Espionage Act. Schenck was indited under three counts. The first charge was conspiring to violate the Espionage Act by causing and attempting to cause insubordination in the military and naval forces. To obstruct the recruiting and enlistment service when the nation is at war with the German Empire led to this conclusion. The second count alleged to use the mail for the transmission of matter declared to be non-mailable. Thus the third charge was unlawful use of the mails for the transmission of the same matter. The defendant was found guilty on all counts. It was then stated that though the First Amendment protects one's freedom of speech, this case have argued some other points which must be brought to light. There is no reasonable doubt that the defendant was largely instrumental in sending the circulars. But the search warrant under which the circulars was obtain was issued against the Socialist headquarters and not against Schenck and thus the documents were not technically in his possession. Then specific examples were given of how the circulars broke the law. The first side declared that the Conscription act was despotism and a monstrous wrong against humanity. And that it denied the power to send out citizens away to foreign shoes to shoot up the people of other lands. The significance of this case was to clarify that in times of war rights are sometime compromised. "But the character of every act depends upon the circumstances in which it is done" It is a question of proximity and degree.