Supreme Court Protecting Symbols Of Speech

The Supreme Court has made clear in a series of cases that symbolic expression (or expressive conduct) may be protected by the First Amendment (Cline, 2011.) However, of the approximately 100 demonstrators, Johnson alone was charged with a crime. Johnson appealed his conviction and his case eventually went to the Supreme Court.

The 1960’s was the height of many civil rights and anti-war protests. During this time, student activist became more radical. It began mostly on college campuses when students would organize “teach-ins” to express their opposition to the Vietnam War. In 1969, the Supreme Court issued a ruling in a case called Tinker v. Des Moines. This case changed the history of America because it gave students freedom to voice their opinions. In the case of Tinker v. Des Moines, the question of whether or not the First Amendment’s free speech rights extend to students’ symbolic speech can be analyzed by examining the background, considering the arguments, and reviewing the impact.

In chapter five The First Amendment states “Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech…”(121). This means that citizens expect the government to give them the choice to speak and hear what they want. In addition, freedom of speech can include symbols, signs, and non-verbal

This case involves a number of issues concerning free speech rights, the Establishment Clause, and their incorporation under the 14th Amendment. First, the Court must first decide whether the school facilities sought for use by the petitioner constitute a public forum to determine which standard of review should be applied to the State’s regulations. Upon establishing the standard of review to be used, the Court must determine whether the 1st Amendment free speech rights of the petitioner as applied to the states by the 14th Amendment were violated by the policy in question. If such a violation is found, the Court must subsequently rule whether said violation was justified by, as the State will argue, a compelling state interest in avoiding a violation of the Establishment Clause. Independent from these other issues, the Court must determine if, as the District Court ruled, the School Board’s policy’s distinction between permitted and prohibited activities is unconstitutionally vague.

Freedom of Expression is a right that all Americans can joy on a daily basis, now imagine if it were a controlled right? That doesn’t make it a right, more so something that we can use when the government says so. In November of 1968, 4 students organized a silent protest against the US policies in Vietnam, which ended with suspension from their local schools. The issue was brought up in court, which led to split consensus. The majority opinion of the Supreme Court was that the expression of speech couldn’t be prohibited unless it was a disruption and harmed the rights of others. The dissent opinion stated that if freedom of speech was without a limit to an extent, who says it could lead to school being a platform for the exercise of free speech instead of education. The argument came to the conclusion of defining the rights and freedom of speech for children in school. I agree with the majority opinion, seeing the freedom of expression shouldn’t be controlled and such.

The act of burning the American flag is definitely a symbolic expression for the flag itself is symbolic by definition and expression is the purpose of the flag (Arbukle, 22). In other words, the American flag represents the nation’s symbol and the individual acts on it to express ideas or political opinions. According to Mark Arbukle, displaying the flag is a form of symbolic expression, so it would be unfair and illogical if burning the flag is not a symbolic expression. Using the same logic, if burning the flag is restricted then displaying the flag can be restricted as well. It is difficult to exclude either of them from Free Speech protection because after all, they always serve for a political purpose due to the flag nature as a symbol of the country.

2. Very little expression is “mere” speech. Under the broad category of free speech is the concept of “symbolic speech.”

An Author's argument in an editorial is sometimes filled with bias and opinions on the topic. The article “Boobies, The Courts and Free Speech.” is about two middle school girls who got suspended showing there support on breast cancer.

Symbolic speech in schools has been debated for decades. It can be seen as subtle words used between classmates, or quite evident like a shirt containing graphic material. In all cases, a basic school of thought must be applied: the effects on learning. In the eyes of the law, the freedom of speech is overruled by the freedom to learn. The freedom to learn may not be as easy to interpret in the bill of rights, but is present nonetheless. For example, students cannot wear articles of clothing that imply drugs/alcohol. An acceptable instance would be if a student wore a shirt that peacefully expresses one’s religion. Although both examples are protected under the constitution, the shirt implying drugs/alcohol isn’t protected because it infringes

Outside of the 1984 Republican National Convention in Dallas, Texas, many people protested President Ronald Reagan’s policies. Among the protestors was one man named Gregory Lee Johnson. This man was so upset by the policies of the President that he burned an American flag in protest. By doing this, a statute in Texas was violated. This statute prevented the desecration of an American flag if it could possibly anger other people amongst the protest. Johnson was arrested and charged with this violation. He was later tried in court and convicted, but he made an appeal stating that by burning the flag he was expressing his rights of “symbolic speech” which are protected by the first amendment (uscourts.gov). The definition of symbolic speech is the same as a term called “speech plus”. This is a form of expression in which behavior is used by itself or in coordination with written or spoken

I experimented with several different sequencing of search logic. At first I used "symbolic speech" instead of "flag-burning," but the results were too large for the purposes of this paper. The search logic above worked best for the limits of this paper.

The First Amendment gives the citizens of the United States their most important rights: the right to freedom of speech, freedom of press, freedom of religion, and the freedom of assembly. Over time these rights have worked themselves into the everyday lives of United States citizens. However, there are still places where our First Amendment rights may be compromised. In the school system, finding a balance of respect and freedom of speech and press is as difficult as learning out to tightrope walk. One wrong step and you could be compromising the learning environment of the entire student body.

After reading the transcript of the speech, “The Spirit of Liberty”, given by federal judge for more than 50 years, Learned Hand, who served most of the time on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in New York, my idea of what it means to be an American was slightly shifted. The statement made by Hand which really caught my attention was, “What do we mean when we say that first of all we seek liberty? I often wonder whether we do not rest our hopes too much upon constitutions, upon laws and upon courts. These are false hopes.” I agree with Hand in the sense that the constitution can only serve purpose to our country if we, as Americans, learn to be truly accepting.

Even though freedom of speech can be tricky, being able to excogitate is key to understanding what can be said under the first amendment is key. This will give you more confidence when you're talking about current events, it'll inhibit social interaction, but the biggest reason of all is understanding your rights will keep you out of jail. Even the supreme court struggles to determine what exactly constitutes protected speech. When trying to see if your covered by the first amendment, certain questions have to be displayed. Are we free to say whatever we want? Exactly what is freedom of speech, what can I say, and what can't I say and still be covered by the first amendment? Understanding the dilemma that freedom of speech just like anything

I feel that it is good that we have a protection like the symbolic speech because it gives people the freedom to express their emotions without being punished. Even though I do not agree with some of the things people do as in the burning of the American flag or walking over it because I feel as if it is a disrespect to all Americans. But they feel they have a reason to do it so who am I to say they do not. I feel without this protection people would feel that they could not express how they felt about a situation that they are going through. Maybe they feel that America is doing wrong by their people, corporation, or government.