We are here on behalf of Mr. Gitlow being detained for criminal anarchy by the New York police.
As Gitlow's attorney, I argue that New York can not show that Gitlow had caused any harm. Also that there was no evidence that anyone had been influenced to any action by Gitlow's pamphlet.
As New York's defendant, I argue that any State had the authority to prevent violence. The New York State legislature acted to ensure the public safety. Gitlow engaged in actions that appeared to be a threat to the people of New York.
The majority opinion was "that freedom of speech and of the press which are protected by the First Amendment from abridgment by Congress are among the fundamental personal rights and ‘liberties’ protected by the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment from impairment by the States.”
Dissenting Opinion: Justice Holmes argued that the 1st amendment protecting the freedom of speech and press only goes so far. The supreme court decided that the freedom speech and press did not apply when others lives were put at risk. Holmes said that in some of Gitlow's radical papers massive strikes were necessary to overthrow the government. The Supreme Court did not agree.