[dragonwriter]

"Holmes famous phrase" was an emotional argument irrelevant to the facts of the case it was offered in, unsupported by the case law then or now, in one of the most repugnant, anti-free-speech decisions in history, which allowed criminal punishment for pure political speech (and which has since been overturned.)

[pdabbadabba]

I agree with you about Schenck, but I'm not sure what this has to do with the broader point at hand. Whatever you might think about Schenck, it is indisputably correct under American law that there are significant categories of speech that can be either proscribed or compelled. Schenck is just one of very many cases that demonstrate this.