This document discusses a 1917 political cartoon and a key First Amendment court case from that era, Masses Publishing Co. v Patten. In Masses, Judge Learned Hand ruled that a postmaster violated the First Amendment by refusing to mail a revolutionary journal. Hand proposed an "incitement test", examining if words were direct triggers to illegal action rather than persuasion. The document asks if Hand's approach is preferable to what Holmes and Brandeis suggested in their dissents, and which test offers more protection of free speech.

1. - Physically Fit, a political cartoon by
Henry Glintenkamp 1917
- Only one judicial decision in this
era could be called a genuine First
Amendment victory, Masses
Publishing Co. v Patten (S. D. N. Y.
1917). In Masses, Judge Learned
Hand found that the postmaster's
refusal to allow mailing of a
revolutionary journal violated the
First Amendment. Hand proposed
an incitement test, requiring focus
on whether the words were
"triggers to action" rather than
"keys to persuasion." Is the Hand
approach preferable to that
suggested by Holmes and Brandeis
in their dissents? Which test offers
more protection?