iv. “The question in every case is whether the words used are used in such circumstances and are of such nature to create a clear and present danger that will bring about the substantive evils that Congress has a right to prevent”
v. That’s known as the clear and present danger test. Duh.
r. Because the actions of the defendants were deemed to create a clear and present danger to the US at that time, the Supreme court upheld their convictions.
9. Tinker v Des Moine Independent County School District (pg 500)- involved 3 public school students who wore a black armbands to protest the Vietnam War. Principles in their school district had prohibited the wearing of armbands on the ground that such conduct would provoke a disturbance; the district suspended the students but the Supreme Court overturned the suspensions.
s. Justices declared for the majority that the principals had failed to show that the forbidden conduct would substansially interfere with appropriate school discipline.
t. “……fear or apprehension of disturbance is not enough to overcome the right to freedom of expression.”
10. Chaplinsky v New Hampshire (500)- In 1942 Walter Chaplinksy, a Jehovah’s Witness, convicted under a state statute for calling a city marshal a “God-damned racketeer” and “a damned