though the outcomes of schenck and new york times differed, what did these decisions have in common? the…

though the outcomes of schenck and new york times differed, what did these decisions have in common? the government has a heavy burden to prove harm. the government can limit speech that causes harm. the government has unlimited power to limit speech. the government must follow the first amendment.

though the outcomes of schenck and new york times differed, what did these decisions have in common? the government has a heavy burden to prove harm. the government can limit speech that causes harm. the government has unlimited power to limit speech. the government must follow the first amendment.

Answer

Brief Explanations:

In both Schenck and New York Times cases, the principle that the government can limit speech when it causes harm was relevant. The First - Amendment protects free speech, but it's not absolute. Speech that poses a clear and present danger or causes harm can be restricted. The government has the right to limit such harmful speech.

Answer:

The government can limit speech that causes harm.