Anti-sedition laws People v. Most – New York, 1902 (64 N.E. 175); State v. Tachin – New Jersey, 1919 (108 A. 318); People v. Gitlow – New York, 1922 (136 N.E. 317), affirmed, 268 U.S. 652 (1925); Commonwealth v. Widovich – Pennsylvania, 1929 (145 A. 295)
| New York Socialist Congressman Meyer London addressing striking workers in Brooklyn (1916) - courtesy Wikimedia Commons “[A breach of the peace] may be committed … even by spoken words, provided they tend to provoke immediate violence. … The punishment of those who publish articles which tend to corrupt morals, induce crime, or destroy organized society is essential to the security of freedom and the stability of the state.” – Justice Irving Vann, in Most “I find nothing in our statute which makes it a crime to teach such revolutionary doctrines and advocate …. A change in our form of government, except as such teaching amounts to a breach of the peace … Although the defendant may be the worst of men, although Left Wing socialism is a menace to organized government, the rights of the best of men are secure only as the rights of the vilest and most abhorrent are protected.” – Justice Cuthbert Pound (dissenting), in Gitlow “[New Jersey’s anti-sedition law] extends its corroding insidious influence into the public mind and conscience, which today complaisantly applies its provisions to these unsophisticated Russians at the bar, and tomorrow … drags from the tribune a Patrick Henry, a John Brown, or a Wendell Phillips to emphasize the absolute destruction of a constitutional ideal.” – Justice James Minturn (dissenting), in Tachin |
EMPIRE OF LAWS - The Legal History of the 50 American States > 2. MID-ATLANTIC LEGAL HISTORY > 2.5. The Mid-Atlantic States: The Progressive Era and Its Aftermath (1900-1925) > 2.5.1. The Mid-Atlantic States (1900-1925): Progressivism and Worker Safety > 2.5.2. The Mid-Atlantic States (1900-1925): Auto Safety and Decent Housing >