How Did Holmes Respond To The Trial Of Jacob Abrams

1369 Words6 Pages

Abrams was a case under the repressive Espionage and Sedition Acts passed during World War I, the most outrageously unconstitutional violations of our civil liberties since the 1798 Alien and Sedition Acts. The 1917-18 laws prohibited anything — including speech — that criticized the government, brought it into disrepute, and supposedly interfered with our war effort. The Supreme Court consistently upheld this legislation. In 1918, Jacob Abrams and several other Russian immigrants threw down some leaflets from the roof of a loft in Manhattan’s garment district. The leaflets did not oppose the war with Germany. They opposed American intervention in the Russian Revolution and, toward that end, urged workers not to produce arms for that purpose. The government claimed, however, that the war effort against Germany would thereby be hampered. After a trial before a hostile judge, Abrams and his co-defendants were convicted, and he was sentenced to twenty years in prison. (In 1921, while Warren Harding was president, the government commuted the sentences and deported the defendants to Russia.) Holmes Speaks Amid lingering war-time hysteria and fear of Bolshevism, the Supreme Court affirmed the convictions over the immortal dissent of Holmes. In what amounted to an eloquent essay, Holmes dispatched the majority’s decision, …show more content…

“That,” referring to his preceding sentence, “at any rate, is the theory of our Constitution. It is an experiment, as all life is an experiment.” Then he slightly reformulates the “clear and present danger” test he had recently devised as the appropriate legal test. “We should be eternally vigilant against attempts to check the expression of opinions that we loathe and believe to be fraught with death, unless they so imminently threaten immediate interference with the lawful and pressing purposes of the law that an immediate check is required to save the

Open Document