Woodrow Wilson Fourteen Points Address Analysis

Constitutional framers have long feared a strong executive. It sends flashbacks of a time when a powerful monarch ruled over the Colonists, times that were so horrid in government that the colonists must revolt. Daniel Webster, a politician in the 1800s, stated, “The contest for ages has been to rescue liberty from the grasp of executive power.” Over the course of American history, executive powers have gradually increased steadily. Power has been taken during “emergencies” then never returned back to its rightful place in Congress. The philosophy that the President of the United States should have increased powers during times of war has led to radical changes. President Woodrow Wilson’s Fourteen Points Address is one example of a situation

In this speech Woodrow addressed the crowd saying, “You do not love humanity if you seek to divide into jealous camps. Humanity can be welded together only by love, by sympathy, by justice, not by jealousy and hatred.” However, in the America of today, this is false. The time period in which this speech was delivered has drastically changed from current times. One of the reasons why America is politically active is the involvement of citizens in political parties. These political parties allow the nation to be actively engaged in competition with one another; therefore, the citizens will strive for to become the dominant party through involvement. Wilson argued that if one viewed themselves as part of a certain group, then they must not have “sworn allegiance to this great Government. This, on the other hand, is not the case, these political parties are essential to the government and create the basis by which people participate. Citizens often find groups to associate with. This can be anything sports teams to states. They like familiar views and ideas surrounding them as they connect with other people. Groups create dissent and this is crucial to a Democracy, without dissent, Democracy would struggle to

This is exactly what President Woodrow Wilson did when he issued the Sedition Act of 1917. Following this came a series of controversial Supreme Court cases. In the case of Abrams vs United States, citizens were throwing leaflets out of a building that called for cessation of weapons used against Russia being produced. The Supreme Court’s verdict stated that the defendants were guilty under the Espionage act of 1918, an amendment to the Sedition Act of 1917. The Espionage Act bans “any disloyal, profane, scurribus, or abusive language about the form of government in the United States.” Another monumental court case during the occupation of Wilson’s presidency was Brandenburg vs Ohio. This case set the precedent that you cannot punish speech unless the speech is “directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action.” Under these circumstances of war, the Sedition Act was passed and changed the normal law so that any acts against the United States government would be banned. The decisions of these court cases are all consistent with the text in the Sedition act; therefore, the Supreme Court determined the Constitutional verdict based on new