Espionage & Sedition Acts

In 1917 and 1918, Woodrow Wilson urged the passing of the Espionage Act, and later the Sedition Act, in order to combat dissent during WWI. In effect, the Sedition Act made it illegal to speak out against the United States government. The laws are still in place, but AFAIK they have been effectively neutered by other legislation and their constitutionality is considered dubious.

What is needed for the Alien & Sedition Acts to be an integral, or at least a used, part of the US law system throughout most of the 20th century? I can see very interesting WIs occurring both during WWII and the Vietnam War. How would these laws affect freedom of speech and views of it in the US?
 
Not that there was much freedom of speech during Vietnam, with non-violent protesters being tear gassed and beaten by riot police for acting out their first amendment right.
 
Not that there was much freedom of speech during Vietnam, with non-violent protesters being tear gassed and beaten by riot police for acting out their first amendment right.
Under the sedition act of 1918 (repealed 1921), you could have been sentenced to 20 years in jail for that post. There's a serious difference between that sort of thing and the run-of-the-mill police brutality that occurred during Vietnam.
To the OP: The Sedition Act and most of the Espionage Act have been repealed. All that remains of the latter are 2 sections of the US Code dealing with military secrets.

Incidentally, you're a Vermonter? Where in the state?
 

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
I assume the Patriot Act builds on these as precedent ?

Best Regards
Grey Wolf

Not really. The Patriot Act laws are nothing compared to the Sedition Act. I doubt that most Americans, even most American politicians, even realize that the Acts ever existed.

The Sedition Act was clearly and patently unconstitutional. You will find virtually no complaints about it in the media of the time, since any such complaint was, in and of itself, a violation of the Act.

Had it been in place during Vietnam there WOULD have been no mass protests. Any protester would have found themselves in Federal Prison, with a $10,000 fine. Anyone even making a negative comment on the conduct of the war, all the way down to "I think we should be more aggressive" or "the bombing doesn't seem to be effective" would be subject to criminal prosecution.

In all it was a law that would have warmed Stalin's heart.
 
The Sedition Act was clearly and patently unconstitutional. You will find virtually no complaints about it in the media of the time, since any such complaint was, in and of itself, a violation of the Act.

Had it been in place during Vietnam there WOULD have been no mass protests. Any protester would have found themselves in Federal Prison, with a $10,000 fine. Anyone even making a negative comment on the conduct of the war, all the way down to "I think we should be more aggressive" or "the bombing doesn't seem to be effective" would be subject to criminal prosecution.

In all it was a law that would have warmed Stalin's heart.

It sounds like something that would quickly be nullified by Judicial Review...:eek:
 

boredatwork

Banned
How would the political/social climate be like if, for whatever reason, the Acts remained in place through the 20th Century?

In the US?

Almost unrecognizable. For example - how do you run a political campaign if you're not allowed to criticize your opponent or anything the govt is doing?

Much later or no civil rights movement.

No peace protests - so vietnam goes rather differently, as I have to assume the North Vietnamese would be intelligent enough to adapt their strategy to a US without any possiblity of domestic dissent.

Much different relations between the US and many of our OTL allies (or at least, so one would hope...).

Basically you have a true nationalist-fascist government in the US from 1921 onwards...
 

Markus

Banned
Had it been in place during Vietnam there WOULD have been no mass protests. Any protester would have found themselves in Federal Prison, with a $10,000 fine. Anyone even making a negative comment on the conduct of the war, all the way down to "I think we should be more aggressive" or "the bombing doesn't seem to be effective" would be subject to criminal prosecution.

In all it was a law that would have warmed Stalin's heart.


It would have certainly warmed Stalin's heart, but had it been in place in the 60´s we would have seen a lot more massive mass protests. I somehow can´t imagine the public quietly agreeing to the end of free speech.
 
Top