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 clea
r and present danger that they will bring about the substantive evils that Congress has a right to prevent. –Schenck v. United States
Use the excerpt to answer the question.
In this excerpt, Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes explains his ruling in Schenck v. United States. What argument is Holmes making about personal rights and free speech?
A. The constitutional protection of free speech is absolute, and each person has a right to express his or herself however he or she wishes.
B. The government has the authority to prohibit or limit free speech whenever it wants and for any reason.
C. The protection of free speech is important, but there are some cases in which personal expression is irresponsible and can be banned.
D. The public has the responsibility to decide when people are abusing their right to free speech.
The argument made by Holmes was that the protection of free speech is important but there are some cases in which personal expression is irresponsible and can be banned.
<h3>What is the case of Schenck v. United States?</h3>
The Court determined that a state could constitutionally limit an individual's free speech rights under the First Amendment.
Hence, the Justice of the state made an argument that the the protection of free speech is important but there are some cases in which personal expression is irresponsible and can be banned.
