Question
Though the outcomes of Schenck and New York Times differed, what did these decisions have in common?
The government has a heavy burden to prove harm.
The government can limit speech that causes harm.
The government has unlimited power to limit speech.
The government must follow the First Amendment.
The government has a heavy burden to prove harm.
The government can limit speech that causes harm.
The government has unlimited power to limit speech.
The government must follow the First Amendment.
Answers
GPT-4o mini
The commonality between the outcomes of Schenck v. United States and New York Times Co. v. Sullivan is that **the government can limit speech that causes harm.**
In both cases, the Supreme Court addressed the regulation of speech, albeit in different contexts and with different standards. Schenck established the "clear and present danger" test, allowing the government to limit speech that created a significant risk of inciting harm. New York Times v. Sullivan reinforced First Amendment protections but acknowledged that certain false statements about public officials could be limited if they demonstrated actual malice. Thus, both decisions recognize that the government has the authority to limit speech when it poses a potential harm, although the thresholds and circumstances can differ significantly.
In both cases, the Supreme Court addressed the regulation of speech, albeit in different contexts and with different standards. Schenck established the "clear and present danger" test, allowing the government to limit speech that created a significant risk of inciting harm. New York Times v. Sullivan reinforced First Amendment protections but acknowledged that certain false statements about public officials could be limited if they demonstrated actual malice. Thus, both decisions recognize that the government has the authority to limit speech when it poses a potential harm, although the thresholds and circumstances can differ significantly.