Freedom of Speech and Freedom of the Press Quiz

Answer: Schenck v. US

Schenck v. US (1919) was one of the first cases heard by the Supreme Court involving a free speech claim. The Court upheld Schenck's conviction and the Espionage Act of 1917. It set the precedent that freedom of speech is not absolute, and that speech with a tendency to cause substantial evil may be curbed by government.

Answer: Gitlow v. New York

Gitlow was a socialist who distributed pamphlets calling for a general strike. He was convicted under a New York law that made it a crime to advocate the violent overthrow of the government. Although his free speech claim failed, this was one of the first cases in which the Court reviewed the constitutionality of a state law.

In the dissenting opinion Holmes and Brandeis said Gitlow's actions did not present a clear and present danger as there was no incitement to action.

Answer: libel

Near v. Minnesota invalidated a Minnesota gag law and is a landmark case concerning freedom of the press. In 1931 the Supreme Court had not yet dealt with libel as a First Amendment issue.

Answer: West Virginia v. Barnette

Gobitis claimed that the mandatory pledge violated freedom of religion because Jehovah's Witnesses cannot pledge allegiance to anything other than God. The court rejected this free exercise claim since the law had a secular purpose, to instil patriotism.

However, in West Virginia v. Barnette the Court struck down a similar law on the grounds that a mandatory pledge forces a student to verbally espouse a belief and therefore violates the free speech clause. These two cases set up a much stricter scrutiny for evaluating free speech claims than free exercise claims.

Answer: obscenity

Roth v. US dealt with obscenity and set up the first of many tests used to determine what qualifies as obscene.

Answer: actual malice

This case coined the term "actual malice" which is defined as knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard for the truth. In order to protect robust debate there is a higher burden of proof for libel of a government official. The requirement of actual malice was later expanded to include all public figures.

Answer: Tinker v. Des Moines

Tinker v. Des Moines (1969) allowed students to engage in symbolic speech by wearing a black armband to protest the war in Vietnam, provided that the speech did not substantially obstruct the learning process.

Answer: imminence

This case dealt with statements made by KKK members at a rally about taking revenge on the government. From this point forward dangerous speech cannot be silenced unless there is a threat of "imminent lawless action".

Answer: New York Times v. US

The Pentagon Papers consisted of stolen defense documents detailing US involvement of Vietnam dating back to the Truman administration. The attorney general took the New York Times to court for printing these documents, claiming a threat to national security.

In a very divided opinion the Court stated that the goverment had not met the burden of proof and that national security was not involved.

Answer: flag burning

The Texas law against flag burning violates the First Amendment as it inhibits the expression of an idea symbolized by the burning of a flag. However, a law banning outdoor fires could be used to prosecute those who burn the flag.