Please help me with the following question:

Father Arthur Terminiello, in an auditorium in Chicago, delivered a vitriolic speech in which he criticized various political and racial groups and viciously condemned the protesting crowd that had gathered outside the auditorium. Policemen assigned to the event were unable to prevent severai disturbances by the "angry and turbulent" crowd. The police arrested Terrniniello for "breach of the peace.\" He was then tried and convicted for his central role in inciting a riot. in Tenniniei'i'o v. Chicago (1949], the Court found the ordinance unconstitutionally infringed on First Amendment ghts. Noting that "[t]he Vitality of civil and political institutions in our society depends on free discussion," the Court held that speech could be restricted only in the event that it was "likely to produce a clear and present danger of a serious substantive evil that rises far above public inconvenience, annoyance, or unrest." Source: Oyez, Terminiei'i'o v. Chicago (1949) A. Identify a co nstitutional provision that is common to both Terminieiu'o v. Chicago [1949) and Schenck v. United States (1919]. B. Based on the constitutional clause identied in part A, explain why the facts of Terminieo v. Chicago led to a different holding than the holding in Schen-ck v. United States. C. Explain how an interest group could use the holding in Termmieiio v. Chicago to further its agenda