While not too relevant: This is all new(er) to me. I came across these questions when researching the ‘opinion’ of the constitution on Wiki Leaks(is it legal). “Clear & Present Danger” is more than a movie from a few years back.
In 1969 it seems ‘clear & present danger’ was replaced "Brandenburg v. Ohio" . Although I do not recall the exact legal linguistic contortions(phrase) used it seems to still have a lot of room to strip constitutional rights on an as needed basis.
"Abrams v. United States" (The Espionage Act) ruled about the same time by the supreme court also stripped citizens of rights.
Those rulings were important to the POWER of the state to push Citizens into war & combat ‘skepticism’ about the countries actions by the citizens. I am finding info on my own, WiKipedia was where I started. However, if you have a favorite link, resource or site that deals with these… .
While I have a lot of questions. The primary questions I am trying to answer on my own:
-
Did people fight against these laws in similar fashion we fight the Pat Act?
-
How might the wars have changed without these laws?
-
Are there any/many cases of these law being used outside their described purpose(Pat Act was supposed to get terrorists - Now we see it being used on citizens)
-
Have there been other similar laws I am unfamiliar with which are similar?
-
Have the above rulings in any fashion been used in the last 30 years(The 3 hour hearing below indicates they were considered)?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1onHtz_mIWc - Congressional Hearing: WikiLeaks, The Espionage Act & The Constitution pt.1