Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes once famously observed that “[t]he most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting fire in a theater, and causing a panic. It does not even protect a man from an injunction against uttering words that may have all the effect of force.” (Schenck vs. United States – 249 U.S. 47 – 1919) Justice Holmes was not denying the First Amendment (though one certainly can question the application of the principle he articulated to the case he helped decide); he was affirming that even our most fundamental freedoms have their necessary limits.