Case Brief: Brandenburg v. Ohio - First Amendment Analysis

This case brief analyzes Brandenburg v. Ohio [1969], a landmark Supreme Court case concerning freedom of speech under the First Amendment. The assignment examines the facts of the case, where a political leader was accused under the Ohio Criminal Syndicalism Act for making a speech, leading to his conviction and subsequent challenge to the statute's validity. The Supreme Court ruled that the government cannot punish provocative speech unless it incites imminent lawless action. The case overturned previous rulings like Whitney v. California, emphasizing the importance of free speech and its limitations. The case brief discusses the court's decision and its implications, including the invalidation of the Ohio statute, and provides references to relevant legal and scholarly sources.

Running head: CASE BRIEF DISCUSSION
Case Brief Discussion
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Authors Note

1CASE BRIEF DISCUSSION
This paper aims to analyze the landmark case Brandenburg vs. Ohio [1969] U.S. S. Ct.
95, U.S. 444, 89 S. Ct. 1827, 23 L.Ed.2d 430 by stating the facts concerning the case and what
are the laws and amendments related to the case. In the U.S., previously the general rule of law
was that any kind of speech, which supports the violence or breaking the rules is secured by the
First Amendment except influences the individuals directly to take any action straightaway
which is illegal and immoral. Prosecution stated that, Brandenburg, a political leader made a
speech for which violence had been created and he was accused under the provisions of the Ohio
Criminal Syndicalism Act. Later on he was convicted and sentenced to penalty of $ 1000 and 1
to 10 years of imprisonment. He was challenged the validity of the Criminal Syndicalism Statute
under the Amendments to the U.S. Constitution (Lunenburg, 2011).
Basically, the law of Freedom of Speech and Expression is involved in this famous case
and U.S. Supreme Court interpreted the First and Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S.
Constitution. It was decided by the Court that the government has no authority to punish
provocative speech unless it is directed to provoke or producing imminent unruly action and is
probable to provoke or produce such action. Not only that the Ohio Criminal Syndicalism statute
also struck down by the Court as it largely forbid the mere advocacy of ferocity. The case is very
significant as it explicitly overruled the decision of Whitney vs. California [1927] 274 U.S. 357,
cast its hesitation on Gitlow vs. New York [1925] 268 U.S. 652, Schenck vs. U.S. [1919] 249
U.S. 47, Abrams vs. U.S. [1919] 250 U.S. 616 and Dennis vs. U.S. [1951] 341 U.S. 494
(Parker, 2003).

2CASE BRIEF DISCUSSION
Reference
Lunenburg, F.C., 2011. Do Constitutional Rights to Freedom of Speech, Press, and Assembly
Extend to Students in School?. FOCUS on Colleges, Universities & Schools, 6, pp.1-5.
Parker, R.A., 2003. Brandenburg v. Ohio. Free Speech on Trial: Communication Perspectives
on Landmark Supreme Court Decisions, pp.145-159.