Gregory Lee Johnson Case Study

The decision of the United States Supreme Court was an unconstitutional one in my opinion. Johnson burning the flag as a way of expression should still be considered to be a rebellious

You may be asking yourself, what would possess a person to do any physical harm to one of our country's most sacred objects? Well, as we saw in the Johnson case, it was because of his disgust in the USA's policies. Some may not only be disrespectful to the flag, but also to the political leaders in our country. Some may just be moral less. Others may think that desecrating the American flag would be a good way to show his or her

Johnson, 491 U.S. 397 (1989), was heard in the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. Johnson v. State, 755 S.W.2d 92 (Tex. Crim. App. 1988). The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals reversed the decision of the Texas Court of Appeals, Fifth District holding that “Johnson’s right to freedom of speech under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution was violated by the statute. States cannot pass laws which take away freedoms that are promised under the United States Constitution, and in passing section 42.09(a)(3), the state had deprived Johnson of his constitutional right to express his views about the government.” Johnson v. State, 706 S.W.2d 120 (Tex. App. – Dallas 1986). The Texas Court of Appeals, Fifth District had affirmed the decision of the Dallas County Criminal Court which found Mr. Johnson guilty of desecration of the American flag. State v. Johnson, No. CCR 84-46013-J (Crim. Ct. No. 7, Dallas Cnty. Tex. Dec. 13,

The dissenting opinions all focused along the lines of the flag symbolizing freedom, the military as well as how it affects the moral of people and how it defines what an American is by the actions of former Americans. These are what you could call morally right. However, it is not to be confused with what is legally correct. Johnson’s actions should be and were justified by the majority of the Supreme

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,

People watched in shock; Protesters and none protesters circled around as Gregory Lee Johnson lit the American Flag on fire. Why would a man disrespect a symbol such as the American flag, that represents freedom, liberty and democracy? Was he protected by the constitution's first amendment? The Supreme Court answered all these questions we had by voting in favor of Johnson. Johnson's intentions were only political, and he as the freedom of speech. The Supreme Court was correct on this decision on letting Johnson go, since he was protected by his amendments, and no matter what the action was, if the amendment gives us the right, we should be entitled to our freedoms.

Johnson was decided on June 21st of 1989 by the United States Supreme Court. The United States Supreme Court ruled that Gregory Lee Johnson's liberties and rights were violated, and that the burning of the U.S. flag was a constitutionally protected form of speech under the First Amendment. The court decided that flag burning was symbolic speech, and protected under the First Amendment. The opinion of the Court came down as a controversial 5–4 decision, with the majority opinion delivered by William J. Brennan, Jr. and Justices Thurgood Marshall, Harry Blackmun, Antonin Scalia, and Anthony Kennedy. Texas v. Johnson, was an important decision by the Supreme Court of the United States that revoked prohibitions on desecrating the American flag, enforced in 48 of the 50 states. Johnson’s actions, who were supported by the majority argued, that flag burning was explicitly symbolic speech, political in nature and could be expressed even if those disagreed with him, stated William Brennan. The majority also noted that freedom of speech protects actions that society may find very offensive, but society's outrage is not justification for suppressing Johnson’s actions, or symbolic speech. The dissenting opinion, which was written by Justice Stevens, and included Justices Rehnquist, White, Stevens, and O’ Connor, was that the flag's unique status as a symbol of national unity outweighed "symbolic speech" concerns, and thus, the government could lawfully prohibit flag

In the text, “American Flag Stands for Tolerance”, people appear to show strong emotions and opinions about burning a flag. Most would say that it is patriotic that Mr. Johnson starts to burn a flag to express his feeling of disagreement, while others say that it is wrong and deserves punishment. We are all entitled to our own opinions, as Ronald J. Allen states in a newspaper

The United States is well-known for its principles of freedom and democracy, which is demonstrated through the First Amendment’s Free Speech Clause. Thus, American citizens can openly discuss political matters; criticize the President and his Cabinet on television, radio talk show or in the newspaper; or publicly protest against the government tax policy. However, Free Speech protection becomes debatable when some American citizens burn the nation’s flag to express their disagreement to the government. The act of burning the American Flag should be constitutionally protected under the First Amendment’s Free Speech Clause because the act is a symbolic expression that communicates an individual’s idea or opinion about his nation; and that

Johnny Cash once quoted the statement, “ I love the freedoms we got in this country, I appreciate your freedom to burn your flag if you want to, but I really appreciate my right to bear arms I can shoot you if you try to burn mine”. Flag desecration became an issue in the early 1900s which caused a controversy of whether flag burning is right or wrong. Some people believe that they have the right to burn the flag and others believe that its is offensive. While some will say a flag burning law will restrict their first amendment right, it is very disrespectful to those who risk their lives for the country, it creates a controversy in the community, and it is an ignorant way to protest.

The first amendment, as written in the constitution, forbids the abridgement of “speech”, but we have not taken upon the writing that it spreads past spoken and written. Any citizen has the wright to use his or her form of “speech” in his or way of choosing. These forms can be in words, or written down on paper. These ways of speech can also be used in actions, and these actions can express an idea of language as well. When Johnson decided to burn the American flag, he was using his form of speech to get his point across to the new president. When the state came after him, they were in the wrong because of this amendment. Because of this, it was

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

Johnson, was a decision of the Supreme Court of the United States. It invalidated prohibitions on desecrating the American flag. Texas V. Johnson is a very important law in America because it has to do with our country's flag that our veterans have fought for. The Supreme Court made the decision that everyone is entitled to their own opinion for many reasons. It related to the quote because Texas V. Johnson makes sure that no matter how different someone is or someone's actions or feelings towards something is they will always be allowed to their own feelings without fear of someone inhibiting it as long as what they're doing is not life threatening to themselves or others, which is very important because many people have very strong feelings towards our country's flag and this law is here to protect how everyone treats and feels towards the flag because people can be defensive or hurtful since their feelings can be so strong towards our nations flag considering what it means for our country. The Texas V. Johnson is also protected by the first amendment and in lines (1-2) it says “We decline, therefore, to create for the flag an exception to the joust of principles protected by the first amendment”. Under our constitution, compulsion is employed as a permissible means for its achievement which is stated in lines (7-12) that officially says “National unity… under our constitution, compulsion as here employed as a permissible means for it's achievement”. The fist