Court Progression of Schenk V United States?

Could anyone direct me to a source on the court progression of Schenck v. United States? Google hasn't worked for me.

What i mean by court progression is, for example,

(The below is made up)

New York district court says schenk innocent, but you cant dodge drafts

New York state supreme court says guilty, cant do it

Supreme court agress with state court, schenk goes to jail

Obviously more detail than that, but you get the idea. I need the lower courts (below the sup court, i know what happened there) and their decisions.

And yes, i checked Wikipedia. I know what happened once it reached the supreme court, i need what came before it.

Update:

Ive found sites that say it was appealed thru district courts, i just dont know which ones and what was said

3 Answers

Relevance
  • Randy
    Lv 7
    1 decade ago
    Best Answer

    For future reference this is Schenck v. United States, 249 U.S. 47 [1919].

    This dealt with the Espionage Act, title XII which concerned use of the mails and declared nonmailable any newspaper published in violation of the provisions of the act in general and this opinion was held constitutional in this case.

    (as well as the cases of: Frohwerk v. United States, 249 U.S. 204 [1919]; and, Debs v. United States, 249 U.S. 211 [1919]; and, Abrams v. United States, 250 U.S. 616 [1919].

    Within this case there is also an interpretation and application of the Espioage Act of June 15, 1917 (40 Statute 217), and its relation to the guarantees of the First Amendment.

    In the case of Patterson v. Colorado [1907].it was opined “The main purpose of constitutional provisions like the First Amendment was said to be, to prevent all such previous restraints upon publications as had been practiced by other governments, and they do not prevent the subsequent punishment of such as may be deemed contrary to the public welfare.” However, in Schenck v. United States, Justice Holmes expanded and clarified this statement with (in part), “ It may well be that the prohibition of laws abridging the freedom of speech is not confined to previous restraints. . . . But the character of every act depends upon the circumstances in which it is done. The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting fire in a theater and causing a panic. . . . . . Accordingly, it was held that statements in published circulars distributed to drafted men, some of which would have been within the constitutional rights of the publisher in ordinary times, were not to be endured in time of war and could be punished as a conspiracy to obstruct recruiting, under the Espionage Act. The question in every case is whether the words used are used in such circumstances and are of such a nature to create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantive evils that Congress has a right to prevent.”

    Then further it is opined in this case (relative to the 5th Amendment) “The Amendment protects every person against incrimination by the use of evidence obtained through a search and seizure made in violation of his rights under the Fourth Amendment.

    It is unusual in the extreme for a case to reach the Supreme Court of the United States without first having been heard at a lower court and then appealed to the federal court system and eventually being reviewed by the Supreme Court of the United States.

    By and large the Supreme Court of the United States reviews lower court case that have been appealed to the Supreme Court of the United States and accepted for review to ensure that the process was correct.

  • 3 years ago

    In the case of Patterson v. Colorado [1907].it was opined “The main purpose of constitutional provisions like the First Amendment was said to be, to prevent all such previous restraints upon publications as had been practiced by other governments, and they do not prevent the subsequent punishment of such as may be deemed contrary to the public welfare.” However, in Schenck v. United States, Justice Holmes expanded and clarified this statement with (in part), “ It may well be that the prohibition of laws abridging the freedom of speech is not confined to previous restraints. . . . But the character of every act depends upon the circumstances in which it is done. The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting fire in a theater and causing a panic. . . . . . Accordingly, it was held that statements in published circulars distributed to drafted men, some of which would have been within the constitutional rights of the publisher in ordinary times, were not to be endured in time of war and could be punished as a conspiracy to obstruct recruiting, under the Espionage Act. The question in every case is whether the words used are used in such circumstances and are of such a nature to create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantive evils that Congress has a right to prevent.”

  • Frosty
    Lv 7
    1 decade ago

    This site may help. I don't believe it started in the lower courts. I believe that this case was first tried in the Supreme Court.

    http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?f...

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.