Symbolic Speech Should Be Protected Essay

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 "inspiration" for my topic came from our first assignment, the MTU Constitutional Essay Contest, and the NFL kneeling/National Anthem controversy. The extent of the public outcry and the divisiveness it has caused baffles. Kneeling during the playing of The National Anthem at widely viewed sporting events seems like a perfect and peaceful way to bring attention to a societal problem. It is freedom of symbolic speech at its finest. And it is nothing new. Americans have been engaging in symbolic political speech since before we even had a Constitution to protect it. Colonists threw tea in the Boston

Free of Speech is still dilemma to schools. For instance we look in a news article, we find a similar situation like NFL Protest.Although the situation at Harvard, a couple of students were exhibiting the Confederate flag for community view.Derek Bok, a past President at Harvard University and the author of “Protecting Freedom of Expression on the Campus” he discusses the controversial between two groups of the sight of swastika flag at Harvard.Boks argue that exhibiting the swastika symbol distinctly descends within the protection of free speech under First Amendment.But he feel disappointed and himself that students who were involved had see what was being displayed.

 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

But as the observant reader may have noticed, no where in the First Amendment do we find any mention of "expression." Whatever a demonstrator says while burning the flag is speech, but the actual act of burning the flag is expression and, as we have seen, is not necessarily constitutionally protected.

I agree that the category of speech should include symbols. Symbols can simplify certain opinions, in order to easily convince the targeted audience. One example of the Court protecting symbolic speech, is the 2011 case of Snyder v. Phelps. Members of the Westboro Baptist Church claimed the deaths of soldiers symbolizing that God condemned homosexuality, during a military funeral. One of the fathers of the dead soldiers, tried to bring suit against the church stating that it caused him emotional pain. Nonetheless, the Supreme Court overruled the suit; the First Amendment protected freedom of speech in public places. On the other hand, conduct should not be a part of speech, since it displays the person or group’s words through action only.

One of the most difficult issues in working out a system of free expression arises out of the need to reconcile society's often competing commitments to freedom of speech and individual dignity. Many times it does not fit well with either side, so when it comes to creating laws like the First Commandment, it must be direct and accurate. According with Lukianoff, president and CEO of FIRE, the Foundation for Individuals Rights in Education, in his essay the concept freedom of speech really means and how is affecting other countries humans right. American speech laws differ from others countries by been considered radical and to highly offensive.

Freedom of speech is defined by the first amendment as “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of

Time has proved that, by way of exercising these freedoms and rights, technological and social change has benefitted greatly. Hence, if there America was under Communist rule, these freedoms and rights would either not exist, or be under tyrant like control of a dictatorship; a free marketplace of ideas is essential to creating an informed citizenry that is capable of self-governing (Kanovitz, 2010). Let’s discuss some other kinds of speech that are barred because its nature is repugnant to the intentions of the Constitution, written for the purpose of sustaining a peaceful society without government control over the content of public discourse.

Symbolic speech can be expressed in many different kinds of forms. The speech can be spoken, written, or be an action. All of these kinds of conduct could be said to express ideas in some ways, however, only some conduct is protected as symbolic speech. When the court analyzes these types of cases, they will ask the speaker about whether they intended on conveying a particular message and whether it was likely that the audience understood the message and the purpose. For a court to decide that some kind of speech is speech that is not protected as speech the government must prove and show that the speech has an important reason as to not be

In September 17, 1797 the US constitution was fabricated to establish a democratic government for the recently created countries. One of the bill of rights that was established by the constitution is the First Amendment that allows everyone in the US to have the freedom of speech. A variety of people believe that freedom does not contribute to democracy, but these people should acknowledge that due to the nature of democracy, it can’t stand without freedom of speech. Numerous examples of freedom of expression are able to support why freedom of speech contributes to democracy.

Freedom of speech should have some limitations. The American people should have the right to say whatever they want, but to an extent. Whether it is on signs or verbally some things should not be expressed. The United States is well known for being “the home of the free,” but some people take their freedom a bit too far. People can burn flags, protest at military funerals, even use the “n” word and watching pornography in libraries.

The United States Bill of Rights consists of ten commandments these commandments hold society’s terms to freedom and government power. One of the liberties Americans have is the freedom of speech. Free speech in America means citizens have the right to express there opinions to any group as long as it does not end up in violence. This however does not mean we should say whatever we want but the first ammendment gives us that right. However, this freedom draws to question societies regulation. Although, the freedom of speech amendment is crucial to our basic human rights, it also allows for hate groups such as the ku lux Klan, and neo Nazis to rise.

Symbolic speech—expressions neither in print nor verbal—were not explicitly noted in the Constitution, though both civil rights and civil liberties can be implied through multiple sections. Following the addition of the Bill of Rights, the Supreme Court has interpreted the First Amendment broadly to protect symbolic speech. For example, in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, the justices ruled that black armbands protesting the Vietnam war “represented pure speech that is entirely separate from the actions or conduct of those participating in it. The Court also held that the students did not lose their First Amendment rights to freedom of speech when they stepped onto school property.” (Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District)

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution is one of the amendments contained in the Bill of Right which is widely debated. It is a constitutional guarantee that protects citizens and limits heavy-handed government influence or restrictions on a citizen's rights. This paper focuses on the free speech clause of the First Amendment. This clause reads "that Congress shall make no law… abridging the freedom of speech or of the press". The First Amendment states that the government may not infringe on the right of a citizen's freedom of speech by imposing civil liability on an individual or organizations based on what they write or say. However, there are exceptions to this law, defamation, True threats and fighting words are among the few types of speech not protected by the First Amendment. Most often exceptions to this amendment are a result of court cases as the Supreme Court is somewhat reluctant to restrict the clause any further. In cases like the New York Times v. Sullivan in 1964, defamation, or false, reputation-damaging statements are not covered as free speech.