The defendant in this case had railed against the "Moloch of Militarism" and had taken exception to special status granted to the Quakers.
The defendant in this case had railed against the "Moloch of Militarism" and had taken exception to special status granted to the Quakers. It was tied in with another case, Baer v. US, and resulted in the court upholding the defendant's conviction. At issue was a possible violation of the Espionage Act of two years prior due to the Socialist Party secretary's distribution of 15,000 pamphlets urging struggle against conscription. The court ruled that his freedom of speech had not been violated in, FTP, what 1919 case in which Justice Holmes established the "clear and present danger test?"
The defendant in this case had railed against the "Moloch of Militarism" and had taken exception to special status granted to the Quakers.
{Schenck} v. US