Flag Burning Research Paper

The issue of burning the American flag, as a means of expression is continuously argued today. Many

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.

“American Flag Stands for Tolerance”, an article based on the Johnson case, focuses on “a person has a right to express disagreement with governmental policies”(line2). The author of this article focused on the meaning of freedom. In line 65, the author states, “the flag stands for free expression of ideas...The ultimate irony would have been to punish views expressed by burning the flag that stands for the right to those expressions”, meaning it would be pointless to punish those who petulantly burned the flag as an expression of their thoughts, when they have the freedom to express their

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,

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

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

Obviously flag burning is a fire hazard that can have a very harmful outcome to the environment and all of its surroundings. Another argument that is stated in the E.M.S.A. says “Many materials in clothing can burn” (E.M.S.A). “Consider

The court said the government cannot "carve out a symbol of unity and prescribe a set of approved messages to be associated with that symbol . . .” The court also said that the flag burning did not cause or threaten to cause a breach of the peace. After this happened, Texas asked the Supreme Court to look at their situation and Johnson’s case.

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

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

Currently in the US, burning the flag is legal, as per the Supreme Court Case Texas v Johnson. In their ruling, the Supreme Court stated that burning the flag was an exercise of the first amendment right to freedom of speech, and therefore could not be banned. This caused much controversy, and several attempts were made by the President and Congress to ban flag during, however, each attempt was overruled by the Supreme Court. Supporters of flag burning say it is a form of expression, and therefore shouldn 't be banned as it doesn 't bring harm or threaten harm to anyone. This that disagree say that since the Flag represents America and its ideals, burning it is a direct attack on all our country holds sacred. Despite the controversy, and attempts to outlaw it, burning the flag is still legal today throughout the country.

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,

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

The act for which appellant was convicted was clearly 'speech' contemplated by the First Amendment." The court also stated that, "Recognizing that the right to differ is the centerpiece of our First Amendment freedoms," the court explained, "a government cannot mandate by fiat a feeling of unity in its citizens. Therefore, that very same government cannot carve out a symbol of unity and prescribe a set of approved messages to be associated with that symbol when it cannot mandate the status or feeling the symbol purports to represent." The Supreme Court found that the state's first interest of preserving the flag as a symbol of national unity was not made. The state had not shown that the flag was in danger of being stripped of its symbolic value, the Texas court also decided that flag's special status was not endangered by Johnson's actions.

acceptable to have a "narrow, special amendment to protect a special flag from desecration." ("Consequences" 2). Even Thomas Jefferson and James Madison denounced flag burning as a crime (Brady H 2). Others feel that flag desecration disrespects those who lost their lives for our country, stating the flag symbolizes the blood that runs through our country. George Whalen, a soldier, said "the stars and stripes of our nations flag is the symbol of our nation's values... It represents loyalty patriotism and love of our country." ("citizens" 3). Those against flag desecration must remember that the men and women who fought and died for our country were fighting for justice, freedom, and independence, all of which give one the right to desecrate the flag. Yes, the flag represents these freedoms, but the