Gitlow v. New York

Gitlow v. New York (1925)Elizabeth

Cahan

Background The case dealt with Constitutional

amendments, especially Amendment One and the 14th Amendment's Due Process Clause

The Due Process acts as a safeguard from arbitrary denial of life, liberty, or property by the Government outside the sanction of law.

This case also dealt with state governments. It specifically addressed state governments ability to uphold civil liberties expressed in the United States Constitution. 

The Case Benjamin Gitlow was considered a Socialist and

potential anarchist by the United States government. They saw Gitlow as a threat because of his Socialist beliefs.

Gitlow was charged with violating “Anti Anarchist” laws because he had spread magazines and newspapers which talked badly of the United States government and expressed his anti-government views. 

The government was afraid that Gitlow’s words would spark an uprising against the government. 

Following this initial conviction, Benjamin Gitlow appealed, claiming his constitutional rights were violated by the state of New York.

He stated that his charges were in direct violation of his 1st and 14th amendment rights

Verdict The United States Supreme Court found that

Benjamin Gitlow was guilty of his crimes

Because Gitlow spread anti-government and hateful speech he was not protected under the 1st amendment of the United States Constitution

The court also said that individual state governments weren't allowed to deny their residents the civil and human rights expressed within the United States Constitution.

The ruling said that the New York state government abused their powers, but Benjamin Gitlow was in fact guilty of his accused crimes. 

Legacy The decision was the first in which the Supreme Court held that the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause required state and federal governments to be held to the same standards in regulating speech

LegacyGitlow v. New York “was

one of a series of Supreme Court cases that defined the scope of the First Amendment's protection of free speech and established the standard to which a state or the federal government would be held when it criminalized speech or writing.” (Wikipedia)