Abstract Several times in our nation's history, Congress has introduced a bill that would provide for banning flag desecration. Each time, however, the Supreme Court ruled that this act was protected by the First Amendment freedom of speech rights. The debate over this topic continues, with both sides arguing for "the good of the country."
In a 1943 landmark Supreme Court case, Justice Robert H. Jackson wrote, "The freedom to differ is not limited to things that do not matter much" (qtd. in Jacoby el al. 20). This concept can be applied in the debate on whether to amend the Constitution to ban flag burning. When one considers the Constitution and the symbolic meaning of the United States flag, he or she can see that this is
…show more content…
Many people are also concerned with the idea that burning flags somehow dishonors those who fought for this country in the wars. Representative Henry Hyde, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, said, "Too many men have marched behind the flag, too many have returned in a wooden box with the flag as their only blanket... not to honor and revere that flag" (qtd. in Feder 114). However, these flags were also used to honor these mens' lives by protesting some of the very wars they died in; some flag burners so valued their fellow countrymen's lives that they burned the nation's most visible symbol. During the 1960s, those protesting involvement in the Vietnam War burned thousands of flags and destroyed others in several different ways (Relin 18). This was to show that they did not support the war, not that they did not respect those who fought in it for the country they were trying to "better." The flag burners also protested the morality of a war in which the United States destroyed land, blew up homes of innocent people, and burned thousands of people to death. "That, more than anything else, desecrates our flag, making it one of the most distrusted and feared banners around the world. How agitated we become when someone insults our flag, but every day in a hundred different ways we defile it, trample its spirit, drag through the dirt the principles it represents" ("Desecrating" 772).
Burning a flag, as Johnson did, to express dissatisfaction with the policies of our country is the wrong way to express feeling. Other wrong ways to treat the flag is by spitting on, writing on, tearing up, or stepping on the flag.
This paper will dive in and analyze the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in the case, Texas v. Johnson, and the still active controversy among the public concerning what circumstances state governments and the federal government have the right to constitutionally prohibit the burning or other form of desecration to the American Flag. Under its decision in Texas v. Johnson the later ruling in the case of United States v. Eichman, in 1990, the Supreme Court had ruled that government can not bring criminal prosecutions against those whom burn or desecrate the American flag so long as they are engaged in expressions of political views without abridging the right of free speech guaranteed under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution at the time. These rulings have sparked public controversy over whether the Court has gone beyond its correct constitutional role and multiple proposed constitutional amendments to overturn the Court 's decisions which have failed to pass due to lack of majority.
The burning or desecration of the American Flag may fall under both freedoms. 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, 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. As stated in Source D “Justice William Brennan wrote the 5-4 majority decision in holding that the defendant’s act of flag burning was protected speech under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.” 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. Another court case, where the 5-4 majority ruled in favor of the defendant was United States v. Eichman in 1980, a year after the Johnson case. “In the case of United States v. Eichman, 496 U.S. 310 (1990), the law was struck down by the same five person majority of justices as in Texas v. Johnson, 491 U.S. 397 (1989).” [Source D] Multiple times in flag burning cases,
In 1969, the Supreme Court of the United States (U.S. Supreme Court) put forth rules allowing the burning of the flag to be protected under the First Amendment. The U. S. Supreme Court first ruled on flag discretion in 1907 in the Halter v. Nebraska case. Prior to this ruling flag discretion statues strictly prohibited the burning of the American flag , as well as, disrespecting the flag in any way shape or form. In 1968, Congress reacted to the burning of the American flag in New York during a protest against the Vietnam War by passing the Federal Flag Desecration Law. In a few court cases it has been declared that burning the American flag is only illegal if the flag has been stolen. When a flag is worn/torn the proper way of disposing of the flag is to burn it; however, when disposing of a flag by burning it there are steps that should be followed in order to do so honorably. The flag should be folded in its customary manner and then placed on a fire that is fairly large with sufficient intensity to ensure complete burning of the flag. After placing the flag on the fire all individuals should come to attention, salute the flag while reciting the Pledge of Allegiance and observing a brief moment of silence. Once the flag has been completely consumed the fire should be safely extinguished and the ashes should be buried. Congress has made seven attempts to overrule the Supreme Court decision regarding the burning of the American flag by passing a constitutional amendment that had an exception to the First Amendment and allowed the government to ban flag desecration. (Thelawdictionary.org,
In light of recent events, debate has sprung out over the implications of the Confederate States of America’s battle flag. One side strongly argues that it is a sign of intolerance, racism, and hatred. The other strongly disagrees that it is a sign of southern pride, heritage, and states’ rights. The rebel flag is often misconstrued as something hateful, but it still represented a system relying on slave labor and a confederacy that was against the union. The flag shouldn’t be used on official government facilities, but should still be available to the public as a way of exercising free speech rights.
One of the most important cases in the history of the United States, especially for the freedom of American speech and expression, was Texas v. Johnson. This landmark Supreme Court case allows burning the American flag as grounds of symbolic speech. For the Supreme Court, the question was the desecration of an American flag, by burning or otherwise, a form of speech that is protected under the First Amendment? During the Reagan administration, many were upset due to Reagan’s policies, especially his military buildups and his missile reforms. During the Reagan administration, many protests took place, including arm bands to protest military, and sign waving to protest Reagan’s tax cuts that “favored the wealthy”. When the Republican National
The First Amendment says: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press; or the right of the people to peaceably assemble and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. This freedom of speech clause as included in the First Amendment guarantees the citizens of America to express information and ideas freely. But is all form of speech free? On the most basic level, this clause allows for the expression of an opinion or idea without the fear of censorship by the government. It protects all forms of communication, with limits so you cannot always say anything you want, wherever you want, or whenever you want. Fighting words are not protected under the First Amendment, for instance, as are obscene expressions.
If you're living in the United States and burn the American flag it is not right for you to do that because you do live in the United States and you will face consequences or jail time just like the president says. Burning the flag is protected and how I said it does have consequences so people should actually think before they act. Even as much as they want to destroy the flag they shouldn't put their life at risk because it isn't worth it. Burning the flag is not illegal in the United States but it is protected by the first amendment. So if a person would have burned the flag then that person would have been guilty of starting a fire with no permit. Countries that have ban flag burning are China, Cuba, Iran, and North Korea. They should just make flag burning illegal because people will do it without carrying about it. I wouldn't want people burning my flag or other flags even if they have reasons of doing it. This all happened in 1907 when people started messing with the flag. Ever since people started banning flag burning and also passing laws over it. Flag burning isn't only flag burning but also commercial abuse. Throughout the years they still prohibited flag burning and other things against flag burning. Someone who burned the flag was Johnson who did it while he wasn't near the city hall building in Dallas Texas in 1984 and was then sentenced to jail for one
people who have fought for the American flag and all that it stands for, tend
The First Amendment rights have caused much controversy because it allows people to say, act, or feel how they see fit; for example, hanging of a Confederate flag or displaying a swastika in public view. It is a very hard and intense act; although it is their right to do so. According to the Supreme Court’s ruling, the displaying of these symbols is protected under the First Amendment.
Lately, if you turn on the news, the media headlines are covered with the news of protests. These protests include marches, kneeling, and in some cases, even rioting and fighting. However, one from of protesting stands out the most: burning of the United States flag. Recently, protestors have burned the flag to protest the president and the police. Burning the flag is not something new to this country, however. There are many recorded instances of the American flag being burned as a form of speech; especially during the Vietnam War period. I, on the other hand, strongly believe that burning the American flag is wrong. It much more than just a piece of cloth, it is a scared symbol of our country. In order to stop the mutilation of the symbols of our country, I am proposing an amendment to the Constitution. The amendment that I am proposing will empower Congress to utilize their powers to implement restrictions on mistreatment of iconic American symbols.
As to whether the first amendment, from the very constitution that was made to protect freedom of expression, should protect flag burning. Flag burning has been a way in which people have been able to symbolize their feelings towards a certain event or topic. This use of symbolism should be protected by the first amendment, because it is a form of expression, which the first amendment protects, and the American people are not affected by this in a way that will harm them.
Flag Burning can be and usually is a very controversial issue. Many people are offended by the thought of destroying this country's symbol of liberty and freedom. During a political protest during the 1984 Republican Convention, Gregory Lee Johnson was arrested for burning an American flag. Years later in 1989, Johnson got the decision overturned by the United States Supreme Court. In the same year, the state of Texas passed the Flag Protection Act, which prohibited any form of desecration against the American flag. This act provoked many people to protest and burn flags anyway. Two protestors, Shawn Eichman and Mark Haggerty were charged with violating the law and arrested. Both Eichman and Haggerty appealed the
The issue of burning the American flag, as a means of expression is continuously argued today. Many
The issue of flag desecration has been and continues to be a highly controversial issue; on the one side there are those who believe that the flag is a unique symbol for our nation which should be preserved at all costs, while on the other are those who believe that flag burning is a form of free speech and that any legislation designed to prevent this form of expression is contrary to the ideals of the First Amendment to our Constitution. Shawn Eichman, as well as the majority of the United States Supreme Court, is in the latter of these groups. Many citizens believe that the freedom of speech granted to them in the First Amendment means that they can express themselves in any manner they wish as long as their right of