Charles Schenck And The Espionage Act Of 1917

Being a citizen of America in 1917 was a difficult role when your country is on the brink of joining the first world war. The leaders of America had to be careful and precise to accomplish victory. If they had let any little obstacle slip, it could have cost them their triumph, followed by millions more lost lives. That is why Charles Schenck should have been convicted.

Some of the things Schenck said in his pamphlet were not protected by the First Amendment. According to the Schenck v United States Supreme Court Decision, The Supreme Court says, “When a nation is at war many things that might be said in time of peace are such a hindrance to its effort that their utterance will not be endured so long as men fight, and that no court could regard

In the Schenck Pamphlet, he says, “To advocate the persecution of other peoples through the prosecution of a war is an insult to every good and wholesome American tradition. [...] In this world crisis where do you stand? Are you with the forces of liberty and light or war and darkness?” Schenck is telling American citizens that the drafting is insulting what America stands for, which can really alter someone’s perspective of what the government is doing, especially if that citizen has strong pride in their country. Schenck also compares war with darkness which means he is telling people that allowing yourself to be drafted in the war is choosing darkness. This violates the Espionage Act, because in the Act, it says, “Whoever, when the United States is at war, shall wilfully 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 [...] shall be punished by a fine of not more than $10,000 or imprisonment for not more than twenty years, or both.” In simpler terms, this quote is saying that interfering with the success of the military, which includes talking down about the drafting, cannot go without a punishment during the war. What Schenck said could’ve made U.S. citizens doubt their government and the selective service system, which could backfire when the military doesn’t have enough soldiers to protect the

According to Schenck v United States Supreme Court Decision, The Supreme Court says, “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 clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantive evils that Congress has a right to prevent.” This quote means that if the Congress and government decides something someone says is dangerous, then they have every right to remove or prevent that person from doing so. When Charles Schenck said negative things towards the Selective Service Act, it endangered the citizens who were already fighting in the war, because if new recruits decided not to cooperate with the draft, then no one would help protect non-fighting American citizens with the current