What is the 'clear and present danger' test?

The 'clear and present danger' test is a legal standard established to evaluate whether certain types of speech can be restricted under the First Amendment. This standard focuses specifically on the potential consequences of the speech in question, particularly whether it could incite illegal actions or pose a significant threat. This was notably articulated in the Supreme Court case Schenck v. United States (1919), where Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. argued that speech that creates a clear and present danger of substantive evils that Congress has a right to prevent can be limited.

The emphasis on evaluating the potential danger of speech means that not all speech is protected equally, especially when it poses a real and immediate threat of harm or illegal activity. Thus, this standard helps to balance the right to free expression with the need to protect public safety and order, making it a crucial concept in discussions of First Amendment rights.

Differentiating it from other options, the measure for evaluating free speech and assessing equal protection is not focused solely on the potential for inciting illegal actions, nor does it directly relate to the limits of government power in the same context as the clear and present danger standard.