Gitlow v. New York

Benjamin Gitlow advocated the overthrowing of the current government, to be replaced by a communist government.  He was convicted of criminal anarchy, which is a doctrine forbidding the overthrowing of the government by violence in any way, and it can be prosecuted by any form of speech.  The Supreme Court found the issue to be under the ruling of the First Amendment.  Gitlow thought he was protected under the freedom of speech.  The Supreme Court upheld the State decision, that it is illegal to plot an overthrowing.  They claimed the state had the legal right to prohibit this part of the Bill of Rights.

     The Bill of Rights cannot be strictly interpretted, because it would give too much power.  The Supreme Court did the right thing by allowing the state to forbid such actions.  It wouldn't be right to allow treason to occur.  They had to make the statement that not everything is acceptable, which is reasonable.

      There is still controversy over how much freedom someone actually has.  Some may argue that everyone should be able to say what they want.  However, it's obvious that some words have implied motivations.  It could be more than freedom of speech id someone is collecting a group of people through speech who will overthrow the government.  That cannot be accepted.  People have the right to protest and speak their mind, but not to have the intention of bringing people together for violence.  How far people's freedom to say what they want really goes is always debated.