The United States first amendment states, congress cannot pass a law prohibiting a citizen’s freedom of speech. In 1984, Gregory Lee Johnson burned an American flag to protest against Reagan during the republican national convention. He was arrested and charged with abuse of an item if the action were to provoke anger in others. Texas court tried and convicted Johnson, he appealed claiming that his behavior was protected by the first amendment. The Supreme Court agreed to hear his case. The issue was whether flag burning compromises emblematic speech secured by the first amendment. There were three arguments drafted from the proposed question “Is flag burning protected as symbolic speech by the first amendment?” (US Courts). One of the arguments included, “ can the government prohibit the act of flag burning as an infringement on the free speech clause of the first amendment,” (US Courts). the affirmative side argued that the first amendment indeed does protect against symbolic speech but only certain situations pertain to this circumstance. They also claimed that even if the flag was personally owned the government still has a valid reason to protect this object due to what it embodies. Their philosophy was the level of symbolic speech needs to be determined in order to draw the line between criminal behavior and freedom of speech. The opposing argument to this question explains that flag burning is protected by the first amendment even if it’s privately owned. They also state that the government cannot stop flag burning as a form of protest if it does not destroy public and/or the property of others. Another argument involved with this case was,” Should flag burning as symbolic speech be prohibited as an exceptio... ... middle of paper ... ...ar issue came about in the case the United States versus Eichman. In 1989 (as a result to Johnson’s case) the United States passed the Flag Protection Act. This act made it a crime to burn the American flag unless it was properly disposed of due to damage. The Supreme Court ruled this case exactly the same because it resulted in the same issue that freedom of speech cannot be allowed based on the circumstance but should exist in all viewpoints from every aspect. (Oyez). The fault in both cases was that the first amendment cannot exist sometimes, it has to exist all the Time that’s why I agree with the Supreme Court ruling and this is how this court case helped society today. Works Cited 1. Texas v. Johnson. No. 88-155. Supreme Ct. of the US. 21 Jun. 1989. Web. 2. United states v. Eichman. No. 89-1433. Supreme Ct. of the US. 11 Jun. 1990. Web.
Consider your and the court’s response to the above question. Would your decision be different if it could be shown that, in a certain small,
Honig v. Doe, 484 U.S. 305, 108 S. Ct. 592, 98 L. Ed. 2d 686 (1988).
Does the first amendment overrule the Texas law that forbids the desecration of a venerated object under these circumstances?
Johnson and his lawyers were dissatisfied with this decision and made an appeal to the Fifth Texas Supreme Judicial District. This appeal, made on May 8, 1985 would be titled as Texas vs. Johnson. The defense argued that Johnson was prosecuted in violation of the first Amendment, clearly states that no law may take away a person's freedom of speech or expression, and of the Bill of Rights and the free speech clause of the Texas Constitution. Johnson argued that in his opinion, flag burning is part of freedom o...
481 U.S.C. 279. U.S. Supreme Court, 1987.
Free speech and the First Amendment rights do not give people lisence to desecrate a symbol of pride and freedom. It is not all right to protect those who let it burn, lighting up the sky with their hatred. It definitely is not acceptable to insult the men and women who fight every day to protect this nation by burning the symbol of their labors. Therefore, it is crucial that the Supreme Court pass the amendment to the Constitution to protect the flag of the US.
"Schenck v. United States. Baer v. Same.." LII. Cornell University Law school, n.d. Web. 6 Jan. 2014. .
Is the upholding of the American flag as a symbol of the United States more important than the freedom of speech provided by the First Amendment? Are there certain freedoms of expression that are not protected under the First Amendment and if so what qualifies as freedom of speech and expression and what does not? The Supreme Court case of Texas v. Johnson proves that the First Amendment and the freedom of speech are not limited to that of spoken and written word, but also extended to symbolic speech as well. Texas v. Johnson is a case in which the interpretation of the First Amendment rights is at the top of the argument. This case discusses the issue of flag burning as a desecration of national unity and that the flag of the United States should be protected under a law.
The First Amendment of the United States gives citizens the five main rights to freedom. Freedom of speech is one of the rights. If people did not have the freedom of speech there would be no way of expressing one’s self and no way to show individuality between beliefs. This Amendment becomes one of the issues in the Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District Supreme Court case that happened in December of 1969. In the case of Tinker v. Des Moines there were five students that got suspended for wearing armbands to protest the Government’s policy in Vietnam. Wearing these armbands was letting the students express their beliefs peacefully. Many people would consider that the school did not have the authority to suspend these petitioners because of the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution.
After ruling the case in Johnson’s favor, it made it difficult to make a law banning the act of flag burning. Laws would be suggested and one would make it to the supreme court. The law would make flag burning a national offense punishable by law. Unfortunately the same majority decision as in the Texas v. Johnson case would arise as a five-to-four majority agreed once again that the law would abridge the right to freedom of speech. Seeing as the same judges presided over the case, the same defense was used to justify their ruling on the law. It was unconstitutional to abridge speech and by their ruling in Texas v. Johnson, the majority still viewed flag burning as a form of symbolic speech. Not only did the ruling in Texas v. Johnson hinder immediate lawmaking against flag burning, but it also divided a nation for a time. Johnson burned the flag, so he says, as an act against the Reagan administration. If this was so as he claimed that divided the nation, not only against him but against the supreme court. You have the protestors during the time who agreed with Johnson, the patriots against Johnson, and those left confused about what was right and wrong. No one side was right, yet no one side was wrong in their eyes. Johnson’s act was crude and even to those who agreed with his right to freedom of speech, they didn’t view his act as unpunishable. The case made the nation doubt itself and its
Stripes and stars forever, right? Well, what exactly does that mean? The American Flag can be seen almost anywhere. From the high-school, to the ball park, and even in our homes, the American flag stands as a symbol of all that is good and true in America. When one thinks of the flag, they usually think of the blood that was shed for this country. It was shed so that we could have liberties, such as, freedom of speech and expression, which fall under the first amendment rights of the Constitution. However, when you think of a burning flag, what comes to mind? One might say it shows disrespect and hatred to a country that has given so much. In the case of Texas v. Johnson, Gregory Lee Johnson was accused of desecrating a sacred object, but, his actions were protected by the First Amendment. Although his actions may have been offensive, he did not utter fighting words. By burning the flag, Johnson did not infringe upon another's natural human rights. He was simply expressing his outrage towards the government, which is within the jurisdiction of the First Amendment.
Much history came within the Texas v. Johnson case. It all started during the 1984 Republican National Convention, this is where Johnson participated in a political demonstration to protest what policies Regan was administrating (Brennan 1). A march was occurring throughout the city streets, which Johnson did take part in. Johnson burned an American flag while protesters chanted him on (Brennan 1). No person was specifically injured during this protest; although, many witnesses were severely offended (Brennan 1). Johnson was convicted of Desecration of a venerated object, which violated the Texas Statue. The state court of appeals affirmed Texas Court of Criminal Appeals and reversed the case stating it was a form of expressive conduct, so it was alright (Brennan 1). In a 5 to 4 decision the Supreme Court came to the conclusion that Johnson’s burning of the flag was protected under his First Amendment rights (Brennan 1). The court also found that although witnesses may have found it offensive, does not...
Declared in the U.S. Constitution every American or should it be person, is guaranteed civil rights. Civil rights did not just consist of “freedom of speech and assembly,” but as well as “the right to vote, the right to equal protection under the law, and procedural guarantees in criminal and civil rights,” (Dawood). It was not until 1791, that the Bill of Rights was appended to the constitution, which helped clarify these rights to citizens. “Rights were eventually applied against actions of the state governments in a series of cases decide by the Supreme Court,” Dawood stated. In previous years (1790-1803), the Supreme Court had little say in decisions being made by government. As time went on the Supreme Court took on more responsibility and started making additional decisions, which in time helped minorities gain their civil rights. It took a couple of years, as a matter of fact till the 1900’s for the Supreme Court to get out of the “ideology of white supremacy and the practice of racism,” (Smith). Though the decisions of the Supreme Court were not all that appreciated in the beginning, following the 20th century the court really facilitated in the advancements of civil rights.
The dissenting opinion to the previous idea is that the government's legitimate interest in preserving the symbolic value of the flag is, however, essentially the same that may have motivated a particular act of flag burning. The flag uniquely symbolizes the ideas of liberty, equality, and tolerance -- ideas that Americans have passionately defended and debated throughout our history. The flag embodies the spirit of our national commitment to those ideals. To the world, the flag is our promise that we will continue to strive for these ideals. To us, the flag is a reminder both that the struggle for li...
"Protecting Freedom of Expression on the Campus” by Derek Bok, published in Boston Globe in 1991, is an essay about what we should do when we are faced with expressions that are offensive to some people. The author discusses that although the First Amendment may protect our speech, but that does not mean it protects our speech if we use it immorally and inappropriately. The author claims that when people do things such as hanging the Confederate flag, “they would upset many fellow students and ignore the decent regard for the feelings of others” (70). The author discusses how this issue has approached Supreme Court and how the Supreme Court backs up the First Amendment and if it offends any groups, it does not affect the fact that everyone has his or her own freedom of speech. The author discusses how censorship may not be the way to go, because it might bring unwanted attention that would only make more devastating situations. The author believes the best solutions to these kind of situations would be to