In 1917, a man by the name of Charles T. Schenck was arrested for violating the Espionage Act. The Espionage Act makes it illegal to, during wartime, “willfully make or convey false reports or false statements with intent to interfere with the operation or success of the military or naval forces of the United States or to promote the success of its enemies [or] willfully cause or attempt to cause insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny, or refusal of duty, in the military or naval forces of the United States, or shall willfully obstruct the recruiting or enlistment service of the United States, to the injury of the service or of the United States.” Schenck was the General Secretary of the United States Socialist Party. The party opposed the military draft and distributed flyers urging drafted men to petition against their military duty. Schenck was sentenced to serve 10 years in prison.
An appeal was filed because Schenck and his counsel believed that the Espionage Act was unconstitutional due to its violation of the First Amendment. The United States asserted that Schenck violated the act by conspiring “to cause insubordination … in the military and naval forces of the United States.” Schenck also believed that the military draft was a slave-like institution and that it infringed upon the 14th amendment.
The Supreme Court Justices were Edward D. White, Willis Van Devanter, Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., James C. McReynolds, Louis D. Brandeis, William R. Day, John H. Clark, Mahlon Pitney, and Joseph McKenna at the time of this trial. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the United States to uphold the Espionage Act and the conviction of Schenck. Justice Holmes delivered the unanimous opinion of the court. In this Holmes sa...
... middle of paper ...
...yez.org/cases/1901-1939/1918/1918_437>
"United States Supreme Court Justices (current) - The Green Papers." 14 Jan. 2014
"Schenck V United States - Kids Law - Laws." 2012. 14 Jan. 2014
"Key Supreme Court Cases: Schenck v. United States - American Bar ..." 2011. 14 Jan. 2014
"Schenck v. United States (1919) - Infoplease." 2005. 14 Jan. 2014
Supreme Court. "Schenck v. United States | LII / Legal Information Institute." 1919.
"249 US 47 - Justia US Supreme Court Center." 2012. 14 Jan. 2014
In the controversial court case, McCulloch v. Maryland, Chief Justice John Marshall’s verdict gave Congress the implied powers to carry out any laws they deemed to be “necessary and proper” to the state of the Union. In this 1819 court case, the state of Maryland tried to sue James McCulloch, a cashier at the Second Bank of the United States, for opening a branch in Baltimore. McCulloch refused to pay the tax and therefore the issue was brought before the courts; the decision would therefore change the way Americans viewed the Constitution to this day.
The decision was a 6-3 decision. The Justices that agreed with the ruling of the court were Brennan, Marshall, Blackmun, White, Stevens, and O’Connor. The Justices that did not agree were Powell, Berger, and Rehnquist.
John Adams, the previous Federalist president, lost the Election of 1800 to Thomas Jefferson, a Democratic-Republican. Before Jefferson took office, Adams decided to appoint as many Federalists into the Supreme court as he could, including William Marbury, all of whom needed to be commissioned in order to be officially sworn in. However, Jefferson took office before the commissions could be handed out, and he ordered his Secretary of State, James Madison, to not deliver the commissions. Marbury proceeded to ask Marshall for a writ of mandamus (found in Section 13 of the Judiciary Act), forcing Madison to issue the commissions. This dispute between Marbury and Madison sparks the famous case. The dilemma here is the differences in interpretation. Some viewed Section 13 as unconstitutional, as it added power to the Judicial Branch, disrupting checks and balances. Others saw that “Marbury had been duly appointed…[and] the writ of mandamus [was] to be an appropriate legal remedy for resolving Marbury’s dilemma”(Clinton 86). Marshall wanted to issue the...
Hall, Kermit L, eds. The Oxford guide to United States Supreme Court decisions New York: Oxford University Press, 1999.
Fred Korematsu was born in the U.S. in 1919. His parents were born in Japan. Since he was born in the U.S. he was a citizen. He grew up like a normal kid in California. As he grew up, his life was normal, until the attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1942.
Separate but equal, judicial review, and the Miranda Rights are decisions made by the Supreme Court that have impacted the United States in history altering ways. Another notable decision was made in the Tinker v. Des Moines Case. Ultimately the Supreme Court decided that the students in the case should have their rights protected and that the school acted unconstitutionally. Justice Fortas delivered a compelling majority opinion. In the case of Tinker v Des Moines, the Supreme Court’s majority opinion was strongly supported with great reasoning but had weaknesses that could present future problems.
Among the many Americans convicted of violating the Espionage Act was Charles Schenck, general secretary of the Socialist Party of the United States. In 1917 Schenck sent copies of a letter urging resistance to the military draft to 15,000 men who had been drafted but not yet inducted into the U.S. military. Schenck's letter claimed that the draft violated the 13th Amendment to the Constitution, which abolished slavery and prohibited involuntary servitude. Schenck argued that forced enrollment into the military was a form of involuntary servitude and therefore should be prohibited. The letters also claimed that businesses had conspired to lead the United States to war, against the interests of average Americans. Schenck advised readers to assert their individual rights by opposing the draft, but he did not directly promote violence or avoidance of the draft laws.
During the late nineteen forties, a new anti-Communistic chase was in full holler, this being the one of the most active Cold War fronts at home. Many panic-stricken citizens feared that Communist spies were undermining the government and treacherously misdirecting foreign policy. The attorney general planned a list of ninety supposedly disloyal organizations, none of which was given the right to prove its loyalty to the United States. The Loyalty Review Board investigated more than three million employees that caused a nation wide security conscious. Later, individual states began ferreting out Communist spies in their area. Now, Americans cannot continue to enjoy traditional freedoms in the face of a ruthless international conspiracy known as the Soviet Communism. In 1949, eleven accused Communists were brought before a New York jury for abusing the Smith Act of 1940, which prohibited conspiring to teach the violent overthrow of the government. The eleven Communist leaders were convicted and sentenced to prison.
The scare of not being united under a time of war was the cause of the Espionage and Sedition acts. These acts immediately caused the unfair conviction of Schenek and put him in prison. Although he was utilizing his freedom of speech, the unfair laws passed through the government by Woodrow Wilson, Congress, and the Supreme Court forbade him his civil liberties.
The thesis of Williams “The Ruling That Changed America” is that the Brown decision changed America for the better, but it wasn’t exactly accepted like it is today. Williams says “The real impact of the legal, political, and cultural eruption that changed America is not exactly what it first appeared to be.” (Williams 387) Furthermore, in the article, Williams validated the thesis by saying “Today, it is even hard to remember America before brown because the ruling completely changed the nation.”(Williams 389)
In summary, Korematsu v. United States (1944), opinion can be seen as one of great historical importance. The reason it is so important is because of the differences in the Judges racial classifications, and personal values. Another important factor in this case is the requirements of military requirement and the Fifth Amendment of equal protection. This case shows the importance of interpreting the Constitution and the different ways that the Constitution can be interpreted depending upon a persons own political backgrounds and beliefs.
... indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.) rights. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the U.S. Government In both cases. http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendment05/
Columbia Law Review, 104, 1-20. doi:10.2307/4099343. Reynolds, S. (2009). The 'Standard'. An interview with Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
In order to enlist more soldiers into the army the Espionage Act of 1917 was enacted into law. The law made it illegal for any individual to interfere in the enlistment process. It law was meet with major protests across majority of the US cities. Throughout the 20th century the law was enforced during all foreign wars, and this led to the draft resistance to Vietnam War. During World War I many opponents who contravened the Espionage Act were imprisoned. The growth of the Anarchist movement was suppressed with the prosecution of two of their members; Nicola Sacco and Bartolomeo Vanzetti in 1920 (Zinn 1995, p. 367).