Discussing Texas V. Johnson Essay

In the case Lawrence v. Texas (539 U.S. 558, 2003) which was the United States Supreme Court case the criminal prohibition of the homosexual pederasty was invalidated in Texas. The same issue has been already addressed in 1989 in the case Bowers v. Hardwick, however, the constitutional protection of sexual privacy was not found at that time. Lawrence overruled Bowers and held that sexual conduct was the right protected by the due process under the Fourteenth Amendment. The effects of the ruling were quite widespread and led to invalidation of the similar laws throughout the United States that tried to criminalize the homosexual activity of adults which were acting in privacy. The case attracted much of the public

This case then was put up to the national level and sent to the United States Supreme Court. There was great public attention because of media. Many groups involved themselves in either trying to support that Texas violated Johnson's first amendment right of freedom of expression, or tried to get a new amendment passed to the constitution stopping the burning of the United States’ flag. The final decision by the Supreme Court on June 21, 1989 was by a 5 – 4 vote, that the Texas court of criminal appeals violated Johnson's first amendment rights by prosecuting him under its law for burning a flag as a means of a peaceful political demonstration. The Supreme Court upheld this ruling, stating the flag burning was "expressive conduct" because it was an attempt to "convey a particularized message." This ruling invalidated flag protection laws in 48 states and the District of Columbia.

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

While the Republican National Convention was taking place in Dallas in 1984, respondent Johnson participated in a political protest. The purpose of this event was to protest the policies of the Reagan administration and of certain Dallas-based corporations. The demonstrators marched through the Dallas streets, chanting political slogans and stopping at several corporate locations to dramatize the consequences of nuclear war. On several occasions they spray-painted the walls of buildings and overturned potted plants, but Johnson himself took no part in such activities. He did, however, accept an American flag handed to him by a fellow protestor. The demonstration ended in front of Dallas City Hall, where Johnson unfolded the American flag, drenched it with kerosene, and set it on fire. While the flag burned, the protestors chanted. No one was physically injured or threatened with injury, though several witnesses had said that they had been seriously offended by the flag burning.

The Supreme Court’s stance on flag burning has remained the same since. Nevertheless, thirty years after United States v. Eichman, there is still controversy over whether or not it should be legal. A recent example of the present discussion on flag burning is a tweet made by President Donald Trump in 2016: “Nobody should be allowed to burn the American flag – if they do, there must be consequences – perhaps loss of citizenship or year in jail!” However, without a reason to change the law besides personal opinion, the Supreme Court is not likely to reverse their decision and make flag burning

In the year 1984-1989 there was a case that struck America and shows a very good example to having your first amendment rights, not everyone will necessarily agree with this but this is how Mr. Johnson took his actions against the supreme court. This case is based on Mr. Johnson feeling violated against his first amendment right and standing up for himself and burning the American flag. Many patriotic people would completely disagree with this but, in our first amendment we have the freedom of speech and freedom of expression. Leading Mr. Johnson to this case because the American flag is supposed to represent our country and our freedom. “Gregory Lee Johnson burned an American flag outside of the convention center where the 1984 Republican National Convention was being held in Dallas, Texas. Johnson burned the flag to protest the policies of President Ronald Reagan. He was arrested and charged with violating a Texas statute that prevented the desecration of a venerated object, including the American flag, if such action were likely to incite anger in others. A Texas court tried and convicted Johnson. He appealed, arguing that his actions were "symbolic speech" protected by the First Amendment.” Based off this case with this evidence this shows how much this could affect Mr. Johnson and the public significantly.

In 1984, during the Republican National Convention in Dallas Texas, a group of protesters gathered to stage a political demonstration (). The protestors were protesting against the policies of the Reagan administration and certain corporations based in Dallas. In the political demonstration, one of the demonstrator named Gregory Lee Johnson set the flag of United States on fire in front of the Dallas City Hall; while the flag is burning, the others demonstrators chanted their slogan. Afterward, Johnson was arrested and charged with the desecration of a venerated object in violation of Texas law. Under the Texas law, it is a Class A misdemeanor for anyone, who “intentionally damage, deface, mutilate or burn the U.S. flag or the Texas state flag” ().

On August 22nd, 1984 Gregory Lee Johnson was arrested on the grounds of desecrating the American flag in downtown Dallas, Texas. His trial was held roughly three months later, where Johnson was then convicted of the crime, sentenced to one year in prison, and forced to pay a fine (Goldstein 37). After a series of appeal attempts, the decision of Johnson’s case was finally reviewed by the Texas Court of Appeals in 1988 and was then overturned. The court of appeals said that Johnson’s actions were protected by his 1st amendment right to freedom of speech. Texas then took that ruling to the Supreme Court where they ruled again in Johnson’s favor saying that Texas’ law against flag desecration was unconstitutional and violated first amendment rights.

In the case of Johnson vs. Texas, Gregory Lee Johnson was brought to court for burning the American Flag outside of the convention center during the Republican National Convention. The incident occurred in Dallas Texas in the year 1984 when Ronald Reagan was President. The report stated that Johnson was protesting against Reagan’s policies in America. Johnson was proved to be a member of a private institution that promoted the communist movement. His protest against Reagan expressed his dissatisfaction. Johnson was arrested and charged for violating a Texas statue fined $2000 dollars for his actions. In response to the fine, Johnson appealed and took his case to the United States Supreme Court.

The case Texas v. Johnson happened in 1984, Gregory Lee Johnson burned an American flag to protest President Ronald Reagan in front of the convention center in Dallas, Texas. He was a member of the Revolutionary Communist Youth Brigade (Texas v. Johnson in 1989: Summary, Decision & Significance, Stephen Benz). During the 1984 Republican National Convention, he participated in a political demonstration. The demonstrators were protesting the policies of the Reagan Administration. While they were marching through the streets, another demonstrator handed Johnson an American flag. Johnson set the flag on fire when they reached Dallas City Hall, where the Convention was held.

The United States Supreme Court found Texas’s flag desecration law unconstitutional during the Johnson verses Texas case. During the 1984 Republican National Convention, Johnson took part in a “political demonstration to protest the policies of the Reagan administration and some Dallas-based corporations” (Texas v Johnson). Johnson burned an American flag after he marched through the streets, while other protesters chanted. No one was physically injured or in danger of injury, although several witnesses were seriously offended by the flag burning. Johnson was convicted of “…desecration of a venerated object in violation of a Texas statute” (Texas v Johnson). The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals acquitted the violation because under the First Amendment, flag burning is expressive conduct; therefore, he could not be punished. The court concluded that the State could not criminally restrict flag desecration in order to preserve the flag as a symbol of national unity. Also, “The government may not prohibit the verbal or nonverbal expression of an idea merely because society finds the idea offensive or disagreeable, even when our flag is involved” (Texas v Johnson). It is unconstitutional to limit our rights simply because someone finds our actions disrespectful. A state may not hold its own view of the flag nor prohibit expressive

III. Statement Facts: The respondent was involved in a political demonstration where he had drenched the American flag with kerosene and lit it on fire. Respondent was charged and convicted of the illegal act of desecration of the flag. The criminal appeals reversed the conviction and said that petitioner could not prosecute the respondent for burning the flag as a part of political speech because it was his use of the first amendment. “Petitioner sought a writ of certiorari to determine whether the conviction was consistent with U.S. constitution amendment, The Supreme Court found that it was not” The Court held that petitioner 's interest in preventing breaches of the peace did not support respondent 's conviction because his conduct did not threaten to disturb the peace. Plus, petitioner 's interest in preserving the flag as a symbol of society and our nation did not justify the criminal conviction for involving his self in political expression.

Furthermore, in the “Texas v. Johnson” court opinion, William J. Brennan publically acknowledged, “Our decision is a reaffirmation of the principles of freedom and inclusiveness that the flag best reflects, and of the conviction that our toleration of criticism such as Johnson’s is a sign and source of our strength” (16). He influenced many significant court decisions leading to the freedom to burn an American flag. The founding fathers were determined to ensure the basic rights of citizens and included the right of

When Johnson burned the American flag, was it a warning or an insult to the people in Texas? The opinion of this court decided that the U.S. Supreme Court accepted to help Johnson because the situation he had when he burned the flag but the government couldn?t help just a little to the other people who had a reason to be helped. In the story it says ?A Texas appeals court reversed Johnson?s conviction, and the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear the case.? Then it states ?Desecrating an American flag was a criminal offense in Texas.? They also don?t care about how Texas feels about the flag burning and they took it as an insult because Johnson violated the desecration law. These all together mean that the government are picky on who?s side they choose but mostly their helping people that are just like them, not other people or

The supreme court ruling regarding the destruction of the American flag decided it was legal because it was an expression of an opinion. Gregory Lee Johnson burned the American Flag publicly at the 1984 Republican Convention to protest Ronald Reagan’s policies - he was “charged with violating a Texas statute that prevented the desecration of a venerated object, including the American flag, if such action were likely to incite anger in others”, however, the court ruled in Johnson’s favor (United States Courts, n.d.). Many witnesses were offended but the burning flag did not physically harm anyone or put anyone in danger, further backing up Johnson with the First Amendment's freedom of (symbolic) speech.