Protest Begets Freedom Analysis

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.

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

In response to the decision made in Texas v. Johnson, Congress enacted the Flag Protection Act of 1989. The Act, this time focused not on simply prohibiting the desecration of a flag, but of protecting the entire physical integrity of a flag. The Act did, however allow for the proper disposal of old, torn, worn, or soiled flags. Congress did this with the purpose of removing language that the courts might find made the statute a statute that aimed to suppress certain kinds of expression. They also tried to challenge the Court and prior rulings to prohibit the burning and desecration of American flags. After Congress passed this law, many burned flags in protest.

The tone between Texas vs. Johnson and American Flag Stands for Tolerance are written in different context.

The central issue in the Stromberg case was whether the state of California violated the First and Fourteenth Amendment by making it illegal to display red flags that suggested support of organizations that dissented organized government or favored anarchic action (Communism). This case was a significant landmark in constitutional law because of the Court’s use of the Fourteenth Amendment to protect a First Amendment right, symbolic speech, from state infringement. It impacted American society in a positive way because it expanded the freedoms in the First amendment and created the doctrine that would be used in cases involving subjects like American flag and draft card burning. The Supreme Court ruled accurately, the government cannot outlaw speech or expressive conduct because it disapproves the ideas expressed. “Nonverbal expressive activity can be banned because of the action it entails, but not the ideas it expresses.” (pg.25)

Texas v. Johnson or American Flag Stands for Tolerance differences? Texas's v. Johnson is the courts decision and the American Flag Stands for Tolerance is the editors opinion. In the courts decision they had to accept Gregory Johnson for his beliefs people were very petulantly of Gregory's opinion. The news paper editor, Ronald J. Allen has his own opinion about the flag getting burnt by Gregory Johnson. Ronald J. Allen opinion is that it is wrong to discriminate the American flag and he still thinks we should have freedom. William J. Brennan thinks that the court opinion is right because the first amendment but he always says one mans opinion will not change our nations attitude towards the flag.

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

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.

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,

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

3. Justice Brennan supports the idea that “the flag’s deservedly cherished place in our community will be strengthened, not weakened” by the ruling is that the flag is a principle of freedom and inclusiveness.

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

In Texas v. Johnson a majority of the Supreme Court considered for the first time whether the First Amendment protects desecration of the United States flag as a form of symbolic speech. A sharply divided Court had previously dealt with symbolic speech cases that involved alleged misuses of the flag. While "the Court had ruled in favor of the defendants in those cases (Street v. New York, 1969; Smith v. Goguen, 1974; Spence v. Washington, 1974), it had done so on narrow grounds, refusing to confront the ultimate question status of flag desecration" (Downs 868). The court ruled in favor of Johnson (5-4), believing that "there was no evidence that Johnson's expression threatened an imminent disturbance of the peace, and that the statute's protection of the integrity of the flag as a symbol was improperly directed at the communicative message entailed in flag burning" (Downs 868). Justice Brennan concluded by saying, "We do not consecrate the flag by punishing it's desecration, for in doing so we dilute the freedom that this cherished emblem represents" (Witt 409). Reacting to this ruling, the Untied State's Congress sought to pass legislation that would overturn it. The Flag Protection Amendment was introduced and then voted down, but then the Flag Protection Act was passed in both houses. President Bush allowed this act to pass without his signature, "an expression

Martin Luther King Jr. once said, “the ultimate tragedy is not the oppression and cruelty by the bad people but the silence over that by the good people”. This quote resonates with me because it explains how normal it has become in our society to dismiss history or the various forms of oppression and dominations. Prior to reading An Indigenous Peoples’ History of the United States, I had very limited knowledge of the massacres, enslavement and tragedies that the Native Americans tribes endured because of colonization. As an immigrant to the United States, I did not know a lot about Native Americans nor were they part of the larger academic conversation. In school the most we were taught about Native Americans were that Columbus sailed the oceans in 1492, looking for India but instead he discovered

Egypt has been fighting a war since the age of the bible. In a biblical sense the Egyptians has always been people of great resilience. The ten plagues could not hold this nation down. For almost 30 centuries—from its unification around 3100 B.C. to its conquest by Alexander the Great in 332 B.C.—ancient Egypt was the preeminent civilization in the Mediterranean world. From the great pyramids of the Old Kingdom through the military conquests of the New Kingdom, Egypt’s majesty has long entranced archaeologists and historians and created a vibrant field of study all its own: Egyptology. The main sources of information about ancient Egypt are the many monuments, objects and artifacts that have been recovered from archaeological sites, covered with hieroglyphs that have only recently been deciphered. The picture that emerges is of a culture with few equals in the beauty of its art, the accomplishment of its architecture or the richness of its religious traditions. ( Ancient Egypt. (n.d.).