Chicano Studies
Brandenburg vs. Ohio
395 U.S. 444, 89 S. Ct. 1827 (1969)
Facts of the case
This case was about Charles Brandenburg, the leader of a Ku Klux Klan group that was arrested under the law of criminal syndicalism in the state of Ohio. He was arrested while giving a speech to a small rally of hooded men, who happened to be carrying weapons and burning a cross in public. The speech was for government to stop suppressing the white Caucasian race. Brandenburg was arrested due the clear and present danger of his teachings for revenge if there government were to get in the way of suppressing the Caucasian race.
Legal Question
Did the Ohio law for criminal syndicalism “(The act of punishing persons who advocate or teach the duty, necessity, or propriety of violence as a means of accomplishing industrial or political reform or anyone who justifies the publishing or circulation of books or display written content to such advocacy)” violate the 1st amendment rights for freedom of speech in the case of Brandenburg vs. Ohio?
Holding
The ruling was in favor of Brandenburg due Ohio syndication rule being overthrown as it conflicted with the first amendment. Due to abstract advocacy the government cannot punish those citizens who freely express speech.
The Opinion of the court
“The constitution guarantee to the free speech, free press do not permit a state to forbid or proscribe advocacy of the use of force or of law violation where such advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless.” The Court used a two-pronged test to evaluate speech acts and as such Speech can be prohibited if it is (1)
