ABSTRACT
Abrams v. United States was a case that revolved around the First Amendment right to free speech in a conflict situation. In Schenck v. United States Oliver Wendell Holmes had upheld the prosecution of Charles Schenck for distributing anti-war leaflets, on the grounds that the First Amendment protection of free speech did not hold in times of clear and present danger. In Abrams on the surface a similar case Holmes and his colleague Louis D. Brandeis dissented, arguing that, in this case, there was no immediate danger and that the prosecution was no more than an attempt to curb free speech and prosecute for belief rather than action. Long regarded as a powerful defense of First Amendment rights, or what Holmes termed free trade in ideas, the grounds for the dissent have largely been rejected by the Supreme Court in the twenty-first century in the context of the war on terror.
