Yes, Holmes argued that this abridgment of free speech was permissible because it presented a "clear and present danger" to the government's recruitment efforts for the war. Holmes wrote: The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man falsely shouting fire in a theatre and causing a panic
Answers & Comments
Answer:
report nyu na ako
Explanation:
kasi nonsense ung sagot ko
Answer:
Yes, Holmes argued that this abridgment of free speech was permissible because it presented a "clear and present danger" to the government's recruitment efforts for the war. Holmes wrote: The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man falsely shouting fire in a theatre and causing a panic