Editing Clear and present danger (section)

===''Dennis v. United States''===
[[File:Fred m vinson.jpg|thumb|right|180px|Chief Justice Fred M. Vinson reaffirmed the applicability of the doctrine of "clear and present danger" in upholding the 1950 conviction of Communist Party USA leader Eugene Dennis.]]

In May 1950, one month before the appeals court heard [[Oral argument in the United States|oral arguments]] in the ''[[Dennis v. United States]]''  case, the Supreme Court ruled on free speech issues in  ''[[American Communications Association v. Douds]]''. In that case, the Court considered the clear and present danger test, but rejected it as too mechanical and instead introduced a [[balancing test]].<ref>Eastland,  p 47.<br/>Killian, p 1101.<br />''American Communications Association v. Douds'' 339 U.S. 382 (1950).</ref> The federal appeals court heard oral arguments in the CPUSA case on June&nbsp;21–23, 1950. Judge [[Learned Hand]] considered the clear and present danger test, but his opinion adopted a balancing approach similar to that suggested in ''American Communications Association v. Douds''.<ref name=Dunlap/><ref>Eastland, pp 96, 112&ndash;113.<br/>Sabin, p 79.<br/>O'Brien, pp 7–8.<br/>Belknap (1994), p 222.<br/>Walker, p 187.<br/>Belknap, Michal, ''The Vinson Court: Justices, Rulings, and Legacy'', ABC-CLIO, 2004, p 109, {{ISBN|9781576072011}}.<br/>Kemper, p 655.</ref>

The defendants appealed the Second Circuit's decision to the Supreme Court in ''[[Dennis v. United States]]''.  The 6–2 decision was issued on June 4, 1951, and upheld Hand's decision.  Chief Justice [[Fred M. Vinson|Fred Vinson's]] opinion stated that the [[First Amendment to the United States Constitution|First Amendment]] does not require that the government must wait "until the putsch is about to be executed, the plans have been laid and the signal is awaited" before it interrupts seditious plots.<ref>Belknap (1994), p 223. Vinson quoted by Belknap.</ref> In his opinion, Vinson endorsed the balancing approach used by Judge Hand:<ref name=Dennis>[http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/341/494/case.html ''Dennis v. United States'' - 341 U.S. 494 (1951)]  Justia. Retrieved March 20, 2012.</ref><ref>Killian, p 1100.<br/>Kemper, pp 654&ndash;655.</ref><ref>{{cite web |last1=Steiner|first1=Ronald  |title=Gravity of the Evil Test |url=https://firstamendment.mtsu.edu/article/gravity-of-the-evil-test/ |publisher=Free Speech Center at Middle Tennessee State University |date=September 19, 2023|access-date=February 2, 2024 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240202103151/https://firstamendment.mtsu.edu/article/gravity-of-the-evil-test/ |archive-date=February 2, 2024}}</ref>

{{blockquote|Chief Judge Learned Hand ... interpreted the [clear and present danger] phrase as follows: 'In each case, [courts] must ask whether the gravity of the "evil", discounted by its improbability, justifies such invasion of free speech as is necessary to avoid the danger.' We adopt this statement of the rule. As articulated by Chief Judge Hand, it is as succinct and inclusive as any other we might devise at this time. It takes into consideration those factors which we deem relevant, and relates their significances. More we cannot expect from words.}}