Loyalty Must Arise Spontaneously From

The Word 'security' Is A Broad, Vague Generality Whose Contours Should Not Be Invoked To Abrogate The Fundamental Law Embodied In The First Amendment. The Guarding Of Military And Diplomatic Secrets At The Expense Of Informed Representative Government Provides No Real Security.

Criticism Of Government Finds Sanctuary In Several Portions Of The 1st Amendment. It Is Part Of The Right Of Free Speech. It Embraces Freedom Of The Press

The First Amendment's Language Leaves No Room For Inference That Abridgments Of Speech And Press Can Be Made Just Because They Are Slight. That Amendment Provides, In Simple Words, That "congress Shall Make No Law . . . Abridging The Freedom Of Speech, Or Of The Press." I Read "no Law . . . Abridging" To Mean No Law Abridging.

What Finally Emerges From The 'clear And Present Danger' Cases Is A Working Principle That The Substantive Evil Must Be Extremely Serious And The Degree Of Imminence Extremely High Before Utterances Can Be Punished...it Must Be Taken As A Command Of The Broadest Scope That Explicit Language, Read In The Context Of A Liberty-loving Society, Will Allow.

Compelling A Man By Law To Pay His Money To Elect Candidates Or Advocate Law Or Doctrines He Is Against Differs Only In Degree, If At All, From Compelling Him By Law To Speak For A Candidate, A Party, Or A Cause He Is Against. The Very Reason For The First Amendment Is To Make The People Of This Country Free To Think, Speak, Write And Worship As They Wish, Not As The Government Commands.