One-hundred years ago, World War I (WWI), originating from a complex web of interactions, aspirations and illusions, commenced as a struggle that would lead to the deaths of tens of millions of people. As documented in my latest book World War I Law and Lawyers - Issues, Cases, and Characters, not only would the war lead to unexpected events such as the downfall of longstanding empires and far-reaching pandemics like the “Spanish” flu, it would also bring unexpected changes in the law of the countries involved in the war. These ranged from the legal control of narcotics in the UK—arising out of sales of such to servicemen—to Prohibition in the U.S.—arising out of military restrictions on alcohol served to troops— and women’s suffrage in America and elsewhere.

The freedom of expression debate in the U.S. included the Espionage Act and the well-known cases of Schenck and Abrams. Security technologies were factors in the treason trials of alleged spy Mata Hari and former Prime Minister of France Joseph Caillaux, the intercepted Zimmermann telegram—one of the many prongs leading the U.S. into the war, as well as the codes developed to protect privacy of communications, including trench cryptographic codes and the Choctaw code talkers in the U.S. military. Privacy was a focus under the Defence of the Realm Acts and the Official Secrets Act in the UK, which allowed the searching of the mail and prosecution for violations of the privacy of information affecting national security. The Espionage Act in the U.S. had similar reach.

The interplay of the right of freedom of expression versus the right of privacy, defined or found in the amendments to the U.S. Constitution—and later in the European Convention on Human Rights—arose in several cases during and after the war. In Schenck v. United States, decided by the U.S. Supreme Court in March 1919, Justice Holmes, writing for a unanimous court and articulating the “clear and present danger” test, upheld the conviction of the general secretary of the Socialist Party for publications attempting to subvert the Selective Service Act, in violation of the Espionage Act of 1917. In Abrams v. United States, decided in November 1919, Justice Holmes had modified his position, in this case involving five Russian-born defendants. No longer was the court unanimous in affirming convictions under the Espionage Act—as modified by the Sedition Act of 1918, with Justices Holmes and Brandeis dissenting.

What had an impact on Holmes’ reasoning in Abrams were the publications by and communications with Harvard University Prof. Zechariah Chafee. In June 1919, Chafee published a law review article titled “Freedom of Speech in War Time,” where he posited that the real issue in freedom of speech is whether the government can punish all words that have a tendency “to bring about acts in violation of the law, or only words which directly incite to acts in violation of law.” He found that it would be “a disastrous mistake to limit criticism to those who favor the war,” as the social interest of freedom of expression in obtaining the truth and being guided by it was being ignored.

Chafee believed that judges were making their interpretations of the Espionage Act based solely on balancing the social interest in public safety against the individual interests of freedom of expression, not the social interest in finding the truth. He took dead aim at Justice Holmes’ decision in Schenck. Holmes’ subsequent dissenting opinion in Abrams said that “It is only the present danger of immediate evil or an intent to bring it about that warrants Congress in setting a limit to the expression of opinion” and “the best test of truth is the power of the thought to get itself accepted in the competition of the market.”

A leading privacy case after the war, Olmstead v. United States concerned Prohibition and wiretapping. This Supreme Court case included Justice Brandeis’ seminal dissent that “Subtler and more far-reaching means of invading privacy have become available to the government.”  As part of the justification for its holding that violations of the Fourth Amendment required “an official search and seizure of his person, or such a seizure of his papers or his tangible material effects, or an actual physical invasion of his house or curtilage" and as such, wiretapping did not violate this amendment, the court cited the WWI case Gouled v. United States.

The Gouled case had arisen from the procurement activities of the war in early 1918, when the U.S. Army Intelligence Department had begun to investigate contractor Felix Gouled, U.S. Army Capt. Aubrey W. Vaughan and attorney David L. Podell for fraud. The three were indicted under the federal criminal code for defrauding the army and for using the postal mail system to carry out this fraud in regards to certain contracts for clothing and equipment such as raincoats. Army intelligence had sent Private Cohen, an acquaintance of Gouled, to visit him, during which Cohen had come away with several papers, one of which was introduced into evidence against and helped convict Gouled. Attorney Podell was found innocent, and Capt. Vaughan had pleaded guilty and testified against Gouled.

The Supreme Court’s opinion answered several questions put to it by the Court of Appeals. These addressed the evidence that had been secretly taken away and also evidence found during later searches pursuant to valid search warrants. The court ruled that the papers of a private citizen that were not fruits or instrumentalities of a crime or contraband could not be seized by the government under the Fourth Amendment and so could also not be introduced as evidence against him under the Fifth Amendment. This applied both to the papers taken secretly during the friendly visit and also those that were seized during the searches under search warrant, if the only purpose of the search was merely to gather evidence to be used against the defendant.

This “mere evidence” rule was to be controlling in federal court cases for nearly half a century.



Written By

Thomas Shaw, CIPP/E, CIPP/US


If you want to comment on this post, you need to login.


Board of Directors

See the esteemed group of leaders shaping the future of the IAPP.

Contact Us

Need someone to talk to? We’re here for you.

IAPP Staff

Looking for someone specific? Visit the staff directory.

Learn more about the IAPP»

Daily Dashboard

The day’s top stories from around the world

Privacy Perspectives

Where the real conversations in privacy happen

The Privacy Advisor

Original reporting and feature articles on the latest privacy developments

Privacy Tracker

Alerts and legal analysis of legislative trends

Privacy Tech

Exploring the technology of privacy

Canada Dashboard Digest

A roundup of the top Canadian privacy news

Europe Data Protection Digest

A roundup of the top European data protection news

Asia-Pacific Dashboard Digest

A roundup of the top privacy news from the Asia-Pacific region

IAPP Westin Research Center

Original works. Groundbreaking research. Emerging scholars.

Advertise in IAPP Publications

Find out how to get your message in front the people you want to reach. Download a media kit now.

Get more News »

Find a KnowledgeNet Chapter Near You

Network and talk privacy at IAPP KnowledgeNet meetings, taking place worldwide.

Women Leading Privacy

Events, volunteer opportunities and more designed to help you give and get career support and expand your network.

IAPP Job Board

Looking for a new challenge, or need to hire your next privacy pro? The IAPP Job Board is the answer.

Join the Privacy List

Have ideas? Need advice? Subscribe to the Privacy List. It’s crowdsourcing, with an exceptional crowd.

Find more ways to Connect »

Find a Privacy Training Class

Two-day privacy training classes are held around the world. See the complete schedule now.

Online Privacy Training

Build your knowledge. The privacy know-how you need is just a click away.

The Training Post—Can’t-Miss Training Updates

Subscribe now to get the latest alerts on training opportunities around the world.

New Web Conferences Added!

See our list of upcoming web conferences. Just log on, listen in and learn!

Train Your Staff

Get your team up to speed on privacy by bringing IAPP training to your organization.

Learn more »

CIPP Certification

The global standard for the go-to person for privacy laws, regulations and frameworks

CIPM Certification

The first and only privacy certification for professionals who manage day-to-day operations

CIPT Certification

The industry benchmark for IT professionals worldwide to validate their knowledge of privacy requirements

Certify Your Staff

Find out how you can bring the world’s only globally recognized privacy certification to a group in your organization.

Learn more about IAPP certification »

Get Close-up

Looking for tools and info on a hot topic? Our close-up pages organize it for you in one easy-to-find place.

Where's Your DPA?

Our interactive DPA locator helps you find data protection authorities and summary of law by country.

IAPP Westin Research Center

See the latest original research from the IAPP Westin fellows.

Looking for Certification Study Resources?

Find out what you need to prepare for your exams

More Resources »

GDPR Comprehensive: Registration Open

New! Intensive two-day GDPR training led by the sharpest minds in the field. It's a can't-miss event.

The Congress Is Cancelled

The IAPP Europe Data Protection Congress 2015 is cancelled. Click through to learn more.

Sponsor an Event

Increase visibility for your organization—check out sponsorship opportunities today.

Exhibit at an Event

Put your brand in front of the largest gatherings of privacy pros in the world. Learn more.

More Conferences »

Become a Member

Start taking advantage of the many IAPP member benefits today

Corporate Members

See our list of high-profile corporate members—and find out why you should become one, too

Renew Your Membership

Don’t miss out for a minute—continue accessing your benefits

Join the IAPP»