3. why did holmes rule differently in the two free speech cases, schenck and abrams?

Schenck v. United States (1919) is a US Supreme Court case in which Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes concluded that the defendants, who were distributing fliers urging resistance to the draft, could be convicted of an attempt to obstruct the draft. This is a criminal offense. Holmes argued that these actions were intended to result in a crime (resisting the draft) and posed a "clear and present danger" of succeeding.Abrams v. United States (1919) is a US Supreme Court case in which the defendants were convicted on the basis of two leaflets they threw from windows in New York City. The leaflets denounced the war effort and advocated the cessation of production of weapons used against Soviet Russia.

In the second case, Justice Holmes dissented from the majority, and ruled differently than in the case of Schenck v. United States. Holmes rejected the idea that the leaflets represented a "clear and present danger" like in the previous case. He argued that the defendants did not have the specific intent to interfere with the war in Germany, and that they seemed to be prosecuted not for their speech, but for their beliefs.