غلط‌گیری‌ها

همین حالا به تصحیح کمک کنیداصلاح شده

متن از maya44 - English

    • JUdgment

    • In this case, the questions raised before the Supreme Court are the following ones: Are Schenk’s acts protected by the Freedom of Speech, included in the First Amendment?
  • Is the ruling delivered by the District Court complying with the First Amendment?
  • Is the Espionage Act complying with the First amendment?
  • No, Schenk’s actions are not protected by the First Amendment and the ruling given by the District Court is in compliance with the First Amendment as it respects the Espionage Act.
    • It has to be noticed that the character of every act depends upon the circumstances in which it is done.
    • In ordinary times, the defendants, in mailing such flyers would have been within their constitutional rights.
  • Moreover, Freedom of speech always has limits when words and expressions are used in a way as to create a clear and present danger.
  • For instance, a man who falsely shouts fire in a theatre would not be protected by the First Amendment.
    • Likewise, during wartime, many words and expressions that might be said in time of peace are harming its effort that their utterance will not be endured until the end of the war.
    • The judgment below for those reasons must be affirmed.

لطفا کمک کنید تا هر جمله تصحیح شود - English