Which strategy would a historian most likely use to determine whether a source is valid?

A historian would first look at the reliability of a source - when it was published and what was happening at the time (context), who wrote it and their qualifications, any bias the author may hold, whether author sources corroborate the source, whether the author has used references, whether the source provides evidence, who the source is representative of and whether the source provides a balanced perspective

Upheld the 1st amendment according to the u.s constitution. freedom of speech being limited in this case yes national emergencies