Where results make sense

About us   |   Why use us?   |   Reviews   |   PR   |   Contact us

Debs v. United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia United States, 249 U.S., was a United States Supreme Court decision that upheld the Espionage Act of 1917. The argument of the Federal Government was that Debs was attempting to arouse mutiny and treason by preventing the drafting of soldiers into the United States Army. This sort of sentiment and speech was outlawed in United States with the Espionage Act of June 15, 1917. en.wikipedia.org /wiki/Debs_v._United_States   (1126 words)

Eugene V. Debs - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Debs was jailed later that year for his part in the Pullman Strike, which grew out of a strike by the workers who made the Pullman Company's cars and who appealed to the ARU at its convention in Chicago, Illinois for support. Debs tried to persuade the ARU members who worked on the railways that the boycott was too risky, given the hostility of both the railways and the federal government, the weakness of the ARU, and the possibility that other unions would break the strike. Debs was, however, largely dismissive of the electoral process: he distrusted the political bargains that Victor Berger and other "sewer socialists" had made in winning local offices and put much more value on the organization of workers, particularly on industrial lines. en.wikipedia.org /wiki/Eugene_V._Debs   (1667 words)

Dennis v. United States (1951) The pretrial motion to quash the indictment on the grounds, inter alia, that the statute was unconstitutional was denied, United States v. United States, 251 U.S. 466, the editors of a German language newspaper in Philadelphia were charged with obstructing the recruiting service and with willfully publishing false reports with the intent to promote the success of the enemies of the United States. United States, "in every case is whether the words used are used in such circumstances and are of such a nature as to create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantive evils that [the State] has a right to prevent." 268 U.S. at 672-673. www.bc.edu /bc_org/avp/cas/comm/free_speech/dennis.html   (19188 words)

No. 98-1828: Vermont Agency of Natural Resources v. United States - Merits United States, 359 U.S. In the court of appeals' view, several aspects of the FCA and its legislative history supported the conclusion that States are "person[s]" subject to suit under the Act. States have filed qui tam actions in the past; their right to do so has not been questioned; and Congress in enacting the 1986 FCA amendments assumed that a State is a proper relator. United States, 320 U.S. 577, 585 (1944), the Court held that a State in its operation of wharves and piers is a "person" subject to the regulatory authority of the United States Maritime Commission under the Shipping Act, 1916. www.usdoj.gov /osg/briefs/1999/3mer/2mer/98-1828.mer.aa.html   (13671 words)

GREEN v. UNITED STATES, 356 U.S. 165 (1958) -- US Supreme Court Cases from Justia & Oyez United States, 341 U.S., the United States Attorney served their counsel with copies of a proposed order on mandate requiring petitioners to surrender to the Marshal on July 2, 1951, for execution of their sentences and with notice that such order would be presented to the District Court for signature on July 2. United States, 350 U.S. The materials on the basis of which this unbroken course of adjudication is proposed to be reversed have in fact been known in this country for almost half a century and were available to the Justices who participated in many of these decisions. United States, 317 U.S. "Since a charge of criminal contempt is essentially an accusation of crime, all the constitutional safeguards available to an accused in a criminal trial should be extended to prosecutions for such contempt." Frankfurter and Greene, The Labor Injunction, 226. supreme.justia.com /us/356/165/case.html   (15433 words)

Gitlow v. New York United States, 183 F. Reasonably limited, it was said by Story in the passage cited, this freedom is an inestimable privilege in a free government; without such limitation, it might become the scourge of the republic. It cannot be said that the State is acting arbitrarily or unreasonably when in the exercise of its judgment as to the measures necessary to protect the public peace and safety, it seeks to extinguish the spark without waiting until it has enkindled the flame or blazed into the conflagration. United States, 250 U.S. Ct. 17, but the convictions that I expressed in that case are too deep for it to be possible for me as yet to believe that it and Schaefer v. jcomm.uoregon.edu /~tgleason/j385/Gitlow.html   (1905 words)

Dennis v. United States   (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-25) Some nations less resilient than the United States, where illiteracy is high and where democratic traditions are only budding, might have to take drastic [p589] steps and jail these men for merely speaking their creed. United States ruled that the question of clear and present danger was for the jury. United States, 322 U.S. The jury was instructed on clear and present danger in terms drawn from the language of Mr. www.law.cornell.edu /supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0341_0494_ZD1.html   (3124 words)

Abrams v. United States (1919) United States, 249 U.S. The first of the two articles attached to the indictment is conspicuously headed, "The Hypocrisy of the United States and her Allies." After denouncing President Wilson as a hypocrite and a coward because troops were sent into Russia, it proceeds to assail our Government in general, saying: [620] The purpose of this obviously was to persuade the persons to whom it was addressed to turn a deaf ear to patriotic [621] appeals in behalf of the Government of the United States, and to cease to render it assistance in the prosecution of the war. United States, 196 U.S. It is necessary where the success of the attempt depends upon others because, if that intent is not present, the actor's aim may be accomplished without bringing about the evils sought to be checked. www.bc.edu /bc_org/avp/cas/comm/free_speech/abrams.html   (2581 words)

FindLaw: United States Case Law For reasons presently to be stated, we conclude that it was within the constitutional power of Congress and the executive arm of the Government to prescribe this curfew order for the period under consideration and that its promulgation by the military commander involved no unlawful delegation of legislative power. Children born in the United States of Japanese alien parents, and especially those children born before December 1, 1924, are under many circumstances deemed, by Japanese law, to be citizens of Japan. We have stated in detail facts and circumstances with respect to the American citizens of Japanese ancestry residing on the Pacific Coast which support the judgment of the warwaging branches of the Government that some restrictive measure was urgent. caselaw.lp.findlaw.com /cgi-bin/getcase.pl?friend=oyez&court=us&vol=320&invol=81   (8016 words)

CITES BY TOPIC: freedom of speech (1st Amendment) United States, 249 U.S. Ct. 249; Debs v. United States, 251 U.S. Ct. 259; Gilbert v. That a State in the exercise of its police power may punish those who abuse this freedom by utterances inimical to the public welfare, tending to corrupt public morals, incite to crime, or disturb the public peace, is not open to question. famguardian.org /TaxFreedom/CitesByTopic/FreedomOfSpeech.htm   (1317 words)

Debs v. US   (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-25) United States, issued a week earlier, in which Holmes had written for a unanimous Court. United States, 250 U.S. 616 (1919), which marks the emergence of the clear and present danger test as a constitutional standard (as distinguished from construction of the Act or definition of inchoate crimes connected with it). United States, 245 U.S. Goldman and companion cases are discussed in David Rabban, The Emergence of Modern First Amendment Doctrine, 50 U. Chi. www.udel.edu /poscir/lesl/try1.html   (1248 words)

Dennis v. United States, 341 U.S. 494 (1951) The case is stated in the opinion of THE CHIEF JUSTICE, pp. United States, 252 U.S. 239 (1920) -- circulation of copies of a four-page pamphlet written by a clergyman, attacking [341 U.S. the purposes of the war and United States' participation therein. Their conspiracy [341 U.S. to organize the Communist Party and to teach and advocate the overthrow of the Government of the United States by force and violence created a "clear and present danger" of an attempt to overthrow the Government by force and violence. www.usscplus.com /online/cases/341/3410494.htm   (13612 words)

The Development of the Clear and Present Danger Test for Subversive Advocacy The first of our cases, Schenk v United States, involves an appeal of the general secretary of the American Socialist Party, who had been convicted for distributing 15,000 leaflets to young men of draft age critical of the war effort and, especially, the draft. Debs v United States involved a speech, "Socialism is the Answer," given by Socialist Eugene Debs in 1918 before 1,200 persons in Ohio. The Court upholds Gitlow's conviction, but significantly the Court agrees with Gitlow's position that states (as well as the federal government) are bound to comply with the commands of the First Amendment, as the protections have been "incorporated" through the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. www.law.umkc.edu /faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/clear&pdanger.htm   (820 words)

Abrams v. United States United States, 249 U.S. The first of the two articles attached to the indictment is conspicuously headed, "The Hypocrisy of the United States and her Allies." After denouncing President Wilson as a hypocrite and a coward because troops were sent into Russia, it proceeds to assail our Government in general, saying: [p620] The purpose of this obviously was to persuade the persons to whom it was addressed to turn a deaf ear to patriotic [p621] appeals in behalf of the Government of the United States, and to cease to render it assistance in the prosecution of the war. We, the toilers of America, who believe in real liberty, shall pledge ourselves, in case the United States will participate in that bloody conspiracy against Russia, to create so great a disturbance that the autocrats of America shall be compelled to keep their armies at home, and not be able to spare any for Russia. www.law.cornell.edu /supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0250_0616_ZO.html   (1281 words)

Criminal Resource Manual 2403 Hobbs Act -- Extortion By Force, Violence, or Fear However, the payment of money in response to a commercial bribe solicitation, that is, under circumstances where the defendant does not threaten the victim with economic harm, but only offers economic assistance in return for payment to which the defendant is not entitled, is not sufficient to prove extortion by fear of economic loss. Hobbs Act violations may be supported by proof of a direct effect on the channels or instrumentalities of interstate or foreign commerce, as for example, where the threatened conduct would result in the interruption of the interstate movement of goods or labor. Several courts of appeals have limited the claim-of-right defense to the context of labor-management disputes by refusing to extend the defense to extortionate violence and economic fear in commercial disputes and public corruption cases. www.usdoj.gov /usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usam/title9/crm02403.htm   (1984 words)

Annotated Constitution pg 328 United States, 249 U.S. 47 (1919); Debs v. United States, 249 U.S. 211 (1919); Surgarman v. United States, 323 U.S. Ex parte Endo, 323 U.S. A mixed pattern emerges from an examination of the Cold War period. www.eco.freedom.org /ac92/ac92pg0328.shtml   (429 words)

Annotated Constitution pg 1037 Justice Holmes was found referring to ``the natural and intended effect'' and ``probable effect'' of the condemned speech in common-law tones. United States, 249 U.S., 204, 206 (1919) (citations omitted). Justices Holmes and Brandeis dissented upon affirmance of the convictions of several alien anarchists who had printed leaflets seeking to encourage discontent with United States participation in the War. www.eco.freedom.org /ac92/ac92pg1037.shtml   (269 words)

Debs v. United States In such prosecution, held, that a document, -- a so-called "Anti-War Proclamation and Program," -- expressing and advocating opposition to the War, was admissible against the defendant as evidence of his intent, in connection with other evidence that, an hour before his speech, he expressed his approval of such platform. Semble, that persons designated by the Draft Act of May 18, 1917, registered and enrolled under it and thus subject to be called into active service, are part of the military forces of the United States within the meaning of § 3 of the Espionage Act. Alfred Bettman, Special Assistant to the Attorney General, was on the briefs, for the United States. www.tourolaw.edu /patch/Debsii   (966 words)

INTRODUCTION TO JUSTICE HOLMES' DISSENTING OPINION ON THE ABRAMS V. UNITED STATES CASE The initial challenge to the law came in the 1919 case of Schenck v. United States, in which a prominent socialist leader had been indicted and convicted for urging resistance to the draft. A unanimous Court had upheld the conviction, and Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes did not depart very far from the older British notion that free speech and press meant little more than no prior restraint, that is, one could say what one wanted, but then could be prosecuted for it. usinfo.state.gov /usa/infousa/facts/democrac/43.htm   (1745 words)

First Amendment Library - Case   (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-25) On December 25, 1921 President Harding released Debs from prison, commuting his sentence to time served. Debs never recovered his health from his time in prison. Harry Kalven, Jr., "Professor Ernst Freund and Debs v. www.firstamendmentcenter.org /faclibrary/case.aspx?case=Debs_v_US   (178 words)

ONU:Exams:French:ConLaw:Spr94   (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-25) Reno, what are the best arguments that the State of North Carolina can make to cause a different result. Comment upon, in particular, the separate opinions of the Justices and the areas of the majority which are most vulnerable. Mitchell, discuss why the provisions of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, may be unconstitutional insofar as they made unlawful the sexual harassment through the creation of a hostile environment which may consist of vulgar and indecent comments or sexuallysuggestive visual displays by men toward women in the workplace. www.law.onu.edu /faculty/french/exams/conf_s94.htm   (604 words)

FindLaw for Legal Professionals - Case Law, Federal and State Resources, Forms, and Code The most important question that remains is raised by the admission in evidence of the record of the conviction of Ruthenberg, Wagenknecht and Baker, Rose Pastor Stokes, and Kate Richards O'Hare. Therefore it is less important to consider whether that upon the third count, for causing and attempting to cause insubordination, &c., in the military and naval forces, is equally impregnable. The jury were instructed that for the purposes of the statute the persons designated by the Act of May 18, 1917, c. caselaw.lp.findlaw.com /scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=249&invol=211   (1103 words)

1st Amendment Online -- Primary Sources/Visual Aids United States, 249 U.S. 211 (1919) (No. 714) (U.S. Supreme Court Records and Briefs, vol. United States, 250 U.S. (No. 316) (filed Mar. 12, 1919) (U.S. Supreme Court Records and Briefs, vol. The "ad parody—not to be taken seriously" in Hustler v. 1stam.umn.edu /main/primary/primary.htm   (694 words)

Professor Jack M. Balkin The First Amendment -- Spring 2003 Syllabus Note and Virginia State Board of Pharmacy v. Notes and Minneapolis Star and Tribune Co. v. Corporation of Presiding Bishop of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints v. www.yale.edu /lawweb/jbalkin/syllabi/1amspring2003.htm   (412 words)

Try your search on: Qwika (all wikis)

About us   |   Why use us?   |   Reviews   |   Press   |   Contact us   Copyright © 2005-2007 www.factbites.com Usage implies agreement with terms.