You Don't Know Schenck

Do you have an absolute right to free speech? The Supreme Court gives its 1919 answer.  Learn the basics about the must-know US History Supreme Court Case challenging the constitutionality of the Espionage Act. If you are in a US History course you best be knowing this case. Trust me.

The First Amendment of the constitution guarantees that each person has the right to free speech. But the Supreme Court has restricted free speech that includes obscenities, libel, slander, words that incite violence or words that pose a threat to the rights of individuals or national security. You do not have the right to yell 'fire' in a crowded theater, as Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes pointed out in Schenck v. United States (1919), when the "circumstances are of such a nature as to create a clear and present danger."

How does the Schenck decison still affect free speech today?

Treaty of Versailles & Wilson's 14 Points

At the Treaty of Versailles in France President Wilson outlined his '14 points' promoting openness, encouraging independence, and supporting freedom. At its heart was his idea of 'peace without victory;' a peace inspired by noble ideals, not greed and vengeance.

Should the United States have ratified or rejected the Treaty of Versailles?

In this activity, you will act as senators debating the ratification of the Treaty of Versailles. Students sitting on the left will be internationalists—senators who support ratification of the Treaty of Versailles.
Students on the right will be irreconcilables—senators who want to reject the Treaty of Versailles.

Below are the six debate prompts. Starting with prompt one, begin the debate! 

 Internationalists answer the odds. Irreconcilable's answer the evens.

1)  Honorable Senator, the Treaty of Versailles is clearly full of flaws. How can you support it? (Discuss for one minute.)

2) My esteemed colleague, you say the treaty is “full of flaws,” but I wonder, can you even describe two of them? (Discuss for one minute.)

3)  Senator, it looks to me like that League of Nations could drag the United States into a lot of trouble. Why do you admire it so much? (Discuss for one minute.)

4) My fellow Senator, you talk about the League causing trouble. Just what kind of trouble are you talking about? (Discuss for one minute.)

5) Why can’t you internationalists understand that our national sovereignty is more important than foolish dreams of collective security? (Discuss for one minute.)

6) Are you kidding? Do you irreconcilables ever consider that collective security might have prevented this tragic war from ever occurring in the first place? (Discuss for one minute.)

The League of Nations was US President Woodrow Wilson's tool for a new and peaceful world after the war of 1914-1918 - and the US should have been their most important member. But the United States never joined and today the League of Nations is often seen as a failure. Was it doomed from the start?