In 1917, the us government passed the trading with the enemy act, the espionage act and then in 1918, the sedition act. each of these acts dealt with "protecting" the us from our enemies in world war i. in your opinion, were these acts necessary and protective or did they infringe upon the first amendment rights of americans?

Due to the State of War, these meassures were necessary from a military perspective to protect the rearguard.

Explanation:

Due to the immigrant base of American society during the period, vivid fear of "fifth columns" were rooted in the USA. However, it can also be argued that these acts were the first act of reflecting the limits of the democratic process when confronted to the so-called "national interest". So, if you agree with the need of the nation, you can justify these meassures to protect the interests of the State (which can also be the ones of the dominant elite).

i would say d tho   ctfvygbuhinjmlk