Brandenburg v. Ohio

What are the FACTS OF THE CASE?

- Brandenburg was a Klu Klux Klan leader in Ohio who led a rally that was filmed by a local news station - station filmed portion of the rally showing 12 hooded members and a burning cross - he gave a speech that used racial slurs and talked about possibly marching on Washington if the government continues suppressing the Caucasian race - Local police arrested him for hosting the rally and having it filmed - He was found in violation of the Ohio Criminal Syndicalism Act, which prohibited promoting violence for social change

What was the REASONING OF THE COURT?

- Supreme Court determined the Ohio Criminal Syndicalism Act violated Brandenvurg's free speech rights - thought laws were too vague and broad - Did not find a clear and present danger of case - believed test had more power during WWII - Court established a test known as the Imminent Lawless action Test, which said speech could be banned if it incited or produced lawless action and was likely to - Found that his actions did not pass this test and further protected his 1st amendment rights - Advocacy of action vs. abstract ideas came into play during this case

What was the DECISION OF THE COURT?

- unanimous decision - Court sided with Brandenburg and overruled his initial conviction given by lower courts

Who was the defendant of this case?

Clarence Brandenburg

What was the topic of this case?

Seditious Libel

Advocacy of action is also known as

Speech Plus

This case serves as a more contemporary example of the Supreme Court trying to come to terms with...

what clear and present danger means