Intermarkets' Privacy Policy

Donate to Ace of Spades HQ!

Recent Entries
Absent Friends
Bandersnatch 2024
GnuBreed 2024
Captain Hate 2023
moon_over_vermont 2023
westminsterdogshow 2023
Ann Wilson(Empire1) 2022
Dave In Texas 2022
Jesse in D.C. 2022
OregonMuse 2022
redc1c4 2021
Tami 2021
Chavez the Hugo 2020
Ibguy 2020
Rickl 2019
Joffen 2014
AoSHQ Writers Group
A site for members of the Horde to post their stories seeking beta readers, editing help, brainstorming, and story ideas. Also to share links to potential publishing outlets, writing help sites, and videos posting tips to get published. Contact OrangeEnt for info:
maildrop62 at proton dot me
Cutting The Cord And Email Security
Moron Meet-Ups

US Attorney: Anti-Muslim Postings on Social Media May Be a Federal Crime | Main | We're Still Allowed to Prancercize, Though
May 31, 2013

Has Obama Repealed the "Clear and Present Danger" Doctrine?

In the early twentieth century, there were a lot of prosecutions of Communists because they urged blowing up factories and train lines -- their literature was full of incitements to violence.

However, in a lot of cases, these incitements were largely (it was contended) rhetorical.

The Supreme Court decided that the First Amendment is too important to permit prosecutions of on-the-line speech -- speech had to be well over the line to be subject to prosecution.

Oliver Wendel Holmes established the "clear and present danger" test -- no speech could be prosecuted unless it produced a clear threat of imminent, immediate (present) lawlessness and violence.

Prosecutions could not be founded on speculative "This might lead to violence" grounds.

Yelling "fire" in a crowded theater could get one prosecuted -- because one can see how such speech would immediately provoke a panicked run for the exits.

Shouting to an angry, near-riotous crowd "Let's go kill the mayor!" could get you prosecuted, because that would be called an incitement which has a clear and present danger of actually being followed through on.

But less than that? Anything less than a direct incitement to perform a specific illegal action which has a present likelihood of being executed?

We are free in such speech. As Holmes argued almost a hundred years ago, we must be pretty free in our speech, or else we'll always be looking over our shoulders and censoring ourselves for fear of the Government Prosecutors putting us in jail for exercising our inalienable rights as Americans.

This was the law of the land for nearly a hundred years.

Apparently it is no longer US law in the Eastern district of Tennessee.

Why? And did we vote on this? At what point did we, as a free people which supposedly decides our own laws, decide to overturn this nearly 100 year old judicial precedent?

Did Bill Killian decide to overturn this precedent himself, or was this directive crafted by his boss, Eric Holder?

Corrected: I originally suggested this case came down in the 30s. It's older than that -- it came down in 1919.

More: A commenter notes the doctrine was expanded and intensified in Brandenburg v. Ohio in 1969.

I've never heard a liberal challenging this doctrine -- until now. They really liked the doctrine when it was protecting elements of the left from prosecution. Now it's protecting some elements on the right (well, I don't know if they're on the right, but they're antagonistic to members of the left's coalition) so apparently now it's been repealed.

At least as far as people hostile to the left's coalition.

digg this
posted by Ace at 11:38 AM

| Access Comments

Recent Comments
Skip: "Bring your reading glasses BOOK THREAD NOOD ..."

OrangeEnt: "Insert last week's comment here. ..."

Just Some Guy: "Hi, gang ..."

pawn: "Got some nice big handles though! ..."

Skip: "Tolle Lege ..."

Florida Peasant : "Austin was trying to steer developers Historica ..."

m: "217 Where did Toto go? Posted by: Dorothy at June ..."

pawn: ""Where did Toto go?" Check the planes down in A ..."

Dorothy [/i]: " [i]There is a possible risk of severe weather to ..."

Way, Way Downriver [/i][/b]: "[i]Austin was trying to steer developers [/i] H ..."

Wolfus Aurelius, Dreaming of Elsewhere [/i] [/b]: "Got to get a few more things ready before the Book ..."

Marlon Perkins : "And most of those canals are inhabited by gators. ..."

Recent Entries

Polls! Polls! Polls!
Frequently Asked Questions
The (Almost) Complete Paul Anka Integrity Kick
Top Top Tens
Greatest Hitjobs

The Ace of Spades HQ Sex-for-Money Skankathon
A D&D Guide to the Democratic Candidates
Margaret Cho: Just Not Funny
More Margaret Cho Abuse
Margaret Cho: Still Not Funny
Iraqi Prisoner Claims He Was Raped... By Woman
Wonkette Announces "Morning Zoo" Format
John Kerry's "Plan" Causes Surrender of Moqtada al-Sadr's Militia
World Muslim Leaders Apologize for Nick Berg's Beheading
Michael Moore Goes on Lunchtime Manhattan Death-Spree
Milestone: Oliver Willis Posts 400th "Fake News Article" Referencing Britney Spears
Liberal Economists Rue a "New Decade of Greed"
Artificial Insouciance: Maureen Dowd's Word Processor Revolts Against Her Numbing Imbecility
Intelligence Officials Eye Blogs for Tips
They Done Found Us Out, Cletus: Intrepid Internet Detective Figures Out Our Master Plan
Shock: Josh Marshall Almost Mentions Sarin Discovery in Iraq
Leather-Clad Biker Freaks Terrorize Australian Town
When Clinton Was President, Torture Was Cool
What Wonkette Means When She Explains What Tina Brown Means
Wonkette's Stand-Up Act
Wankette HQ Gay-Rumors Du Jour
Here's What's Bugging Me: Goose and Slider
My Own Micah Wright Style Confession of Dishonesty
Outraged "Conservatives" React to the FMA
An On-Line Impression of Dennis Miller Having Sex with a Kodiak Bear
The Story the Rightwing Media Refuses to Report!
Our Lunch with David "Glengarry Glen Ross" Mamet
The House of Love: Paul Krugman
A Michael Moore Mystery (TM)
The Dowd-O-Matic!
Liberal Consistency and Other Myths
Kepler's Laws of Liberal Media Bias
John Kerry-- The Splunge! Candidate
"Divisive" Politics & "Attacks on Patriotism" (very long)
The Donkey ("The Raven" parody)
Powered by
Movable Type 2.64