In the case of Krichman v. United States, 1920, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a conviction under the Espionage Act of 1917. The defendant, Mr. Krichman was charged with conspiring to obstruct military recruitment during World War I by distributing pamphlets that encouraged resistance to conscription and promoted disloyalty among soldiers and sailors in service. He argued that his actions were protected by his First Amendment rights to free speech and press. The court rejected this argument stating that while freedom of speech is important, it does not give individuals an absolute right to use words or symbols in ways that create a clear and present danger for others or incite illegal activities such as insubordination within the armed forces during wartime. The ruling affirmed Congress's power to enact laws like the Espionage Act which criminalizes certain types of expression when national security is at stake.

In the dissenting opinion for Krichman v. United States, Justice Louis Brandeis argued that the defendant's conviction should be overturned because his Fifth Amendment rights were violated. He contended that compelling a person to produce private books and papers to be used as evidence against him is equivalent to compelling him to testify against himself, which is prohibited by the Constitution. The majority held that such compulsion was permissible if it did not involve physical or moral coercion; however, Brandeis disagreed with this interpretation of the law. He believed it undermined fundamental principles of justice and fairness in criminal proceedings by allowing self-incriminating evidence obtained through compulsory process. Furthermore, he pointed out inconsistencies in previous court rulings on similar issues and called for clearer guidelines regarding what constitutes a violation of Fifth Amendment protections.