According to this ruling, the government can regulate speech if the words that were spoken (or printed) represent a "clear and present danger" to American society.
This ruling came as a consequence of the case <em>Schenck v. United States (1919)</em>, in which the general secretary of the U.S. Socialist Party opposed the implementation of the military draft. He distributed pamphlets encouraging people to oppose the draft. The unanimous decision was that his words represented a clear and present danger to the country, and therefore his arrest was justified.
I believe it is BERING. Hope this helps!
Answer:
The detail that best supports the answer to part A is:
“The Internet has radically changed how news sources communicate with their audience, and it has made it harder to define ‘news media’ exactly.” ( Paragraph 1)
Explanation:
The passage talks about different sources of 'news media'. It can be newspapers or radio or various internet sources which either read or write about the recent events happening across the globe. The passage also says that news media tries to unbiased as much as possible but it is very difficult to decide whether a given information is unbiased or not.
The detail from text which supports this is Option A. It says how internet being so wide these days that it becomes difficult to make out which news from 'news media' is correct and unbiased.
Answer/Explanation:
The title of the book has a painting of a historical fiction event.
"In times like these it is immature — and incidentally, <span>untrue — for anybody to brag that an unprepared America, single-handed, and </span><span>with one hand tied behind its back, can hold off the whole world.” He is saying this because he believes that the</span><span> United States could handle the problem by itself but would rather </span>not.
(REAL ANSWER)
