Johnson Vs Texas Essay

Burning of the Flag In Ronald J. Allen’s article he discuss a great controversial topic that at the moment, many were talking about. At the time a man had burned an American flag as a protest against government policies. Prior to that, “In a controversial decision, the Supreme Court, by the closest possible margin of a 5-to-4 vote, help that a person has a right to express disagreement with governmental policies by burning the American flag.” Ronald J. Allen’s use of the Three appeals, figurative language, and diction leads one to a final opinion. Personally, I believe that, like Allen mentions, “...the Supreme Court was not wrong.”

Almost two months later after the arrest, the arguments were presented to the three-judge panel of the Texas District Court of Appeals. The discussion was on both issues raised: the equal protection and right to privacy. John Anderson and Chief Justice Paul Murphy ruled in the favour of appellants. They found that they law was in violation of the Equal Rights Amendment to the Texas Constitutions which prohibited any discrimination based on

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.

It’s almost the end of 2016 and we still experience discriminative trouble. We are all different but should accept others differences. After reading “What, of This Goldfish, Would You Wish?”, by Etgar Keret, “Texas v. Johnson Majority Opinion”, by William J. Brennan, and “American Flag Stands for Tolerance”, by Ronald J. Alle, I have found fluent differences in the people explored and the way the people accepted others. In “Texas v. Johnson Majority Opinion” the people of Texas are having a hard time accepting the fact that Johnson had burned a flag. In “American Flag Stands for Tolerance” the writer states that burning the flag wasn’t illegal and should accept those who express what they believe, even if you don’t agree with them. In the story “What, of This

Texas, nicknamed “The Lone star State”, has always been very unique compared to any other state in the United States of America. Texas have a sense of great pride in where they come from. Texans hold their heads a just a little higher than anyone else. Texas is the second largest state in the U.S., Texans have their own pledge of allegiance to the state flag, and is the only state whose flag is permitted to fly as high as the American flag. So, why is it that Texans take so much pride in their own state? Texans take great pride in their state because at one point before Texas was a state belonging to the United States, it was its own country. This is how Texas got its name as the “Lone star” State. In nineteenth century, Texas fought many battles against Mexico and its leader Santa Anna, to gain Independence from the country. After many hostel wars and lives lost, Texas made a break through at the Battle of San Jacinto and conquered the Mexican government in the year 1836, becoming the new Republic of Texas. It then remained Independent for almost ten years. Our Independence and history of secession runs through our veins. The topic is a reoccurring one when it comes to politics. In recent years, there have been talks if Texas should secede from the United States again like they did in 1836. According to a poll in 2009, it showed that “50% Republicans, 40% Independents, and 15% Democrats believed that Texas should stand as an independent nation.” “338157 Texans have already

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

The tones of the Texas vs Johnson and The American Flag Stands For Tolerance have opposite tones because of the context of both documents.

This week’s case study, Texas v. Johnson, 491 U.S. 397 (1989), Gregory Lee Johnson burned an American flag in front of Dallas City Hall as a means of protest against the policies of the Reagan administration. He was arrested by Dallas police officers and he was charged with violating section 42.09(a)(3) of the Texas Penal Code, which prohibited the “desecration of a venerable object.” In this case, it was the contention of the arresting officers that burning the American flag was an act of desecration which was punishable by law. Section 42.09(a)(3) of the Texas Penal Code was enacted by the Texas State Legislature, at the time when this matter was brought to trial, the parties involved were the State of Texas and Mr. Gregory Lee Johnson. The case was heard by three lower courts before it reached the United States Supreme Court. List those three courts in order, beginning with the court that has the most authority and ending with the court that has the least

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.

A man by the name of Gregory Lee Johnson was convicted of desecrating a flag in violation of Texas Law. He burned the flag rather than uttering insulting words, which would have been allowed under the first amendment. Burning a flag, according to Goldstein, is the preferred means of disposing of a flag "when it is such condition that it is no longer a fitting emblem for display."

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

“During the 1984 republican national convention, in Dallas, the defendant, Gregory Lee Johnson and 100 others staged a protest outside the convention hall”. During the demonstration, Johnson

Texas v. Johnson (No. 88-155). Argued: March 21, 1989. Decided: June 21, 1989 In 1984 the Republican National Convention was held in Dallas, Texas. While there, a group of protesters, opposed to President Reagan's reelection, burned an American flag. Specifically, Greg Johnson was seen dousing the flag with kerosene and lighting it on fire. Johnson was arrested under a Texas flag desecration law. He was convicted and sentenced to one year in jail and fined $2000. The State Court of Appeals affirmed but the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals reversed the decision.

Do you think that Johnson is extending his freedom of speech by burning the flag? I say yes, because of how that people fight for your freedom and they risk their lives for you to be free. My second reason is that some of the people around him is in danger because of how he burned the flag in the public square and it might have cause a fire around him or burned those people. The third and last reason is that people may be offended by burning the flag because if some of those people where some veterans and they really respect the flag. That’s why I think that Johnson was extending his freedom of speech.