The Schenck case in the early 1900s was about free speech in relation to the World War I draft. Charles Schenck sent mass letters stating that “the draft was a monstrous mistake motivated by the capitalist system” (Schenck v. United States). The federal government found this to be in violation of the Clear and Present Danger Test and the Espionage Act and arrested Schenck for his actions. The case went to the Supreme Court and was decided in favor of the United States unanimously. The court's opinion violates the free speech clause as well as the right to peacefully protest, denying a Schenck to share his views on the draft with others despite the government's opinion on this action. Because of these violations, the ruling in the Schneck v. United States case should be overturned to protect the rights of free speech and protest all citizens. The ruling in Schneck v. United States should be overturned because it violates the free speech clause. According to the free speech clause, the government has no right to deny anyone the right to express their opinion on government, despite the gravity of the topic at hand. In the Schenck case, the Supreme Court ruled that the United States government had the right to arrest Charles Schenck because of his actions. Due to his arrest, Schenck's freedom of speech was violated when he was arrested for mailing his opinion and advice on the draft. Because Schneck was a U.S. citizen, the government had no right to prosecute him for exercising his free speech. Under the Free Speech Clause Schneck should not have been imprisoned by the United States government simply for exercising his free speech. Contrary to what is stated above... halfway through the document... it may have hindered the war efforts. in America, it has caused no harm to the nation or to the civil rights and liberties of anyone else. Because Schneck was accused of committing a crime by peacefully protesting and exercising his free speech, the court set an unspoken standard for what is appropriate to say and what is not. This unspoken standard in itself violates the First Amendment and is grounds for overturning the ruling in the case. By overturning the case, citizens will once again have full freedom of speech. Schneck did not violate the clear and present danger test or the Espionage Act as he was told. Instead, he simply made his case through peaceful protest and making use of his right to free speech. Since he did not harm anyone or violate the sentence, the case should be overturned due to the innocence and legality of Charles Schneck.