Texas V. Johnson Case Study

There are always at least two different viewpoints on certain principles that raise question. A neutral position is also held when people can’t choose between two different standpoints. The position that I hold is a neutral position. I defend certain beliefs for burning the flag, and not burning it. In my opinion, I think that burning the flag is one of the worst things that a citizen can do for its country. I feel that if you burn your own country’s flag it is somewhat of a betrayal on the country’s history and past. Many people have pride in their country, as many American’s do, and when a flag is burned in

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.

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

A very controversial court case in American history was Texas vs. Johnson (1984). In 1984, a man named Gregory Lee Johnson followed a group of anti – Reagan protesters to oppose the American exploitation of third world countries. This act of rebellion resulted in the burning of the American flag. Out of a total of approximately one hundred demonstrators who were involved in this ordeal, Johnson was solely charged with a crime. Johnson was arrested under Texas law, which made the burning of the United States or Texas flags crimes. Johnson was convicted and sentenced to one year in jail and fined two thousand dollars for his crime in restitution. Texas reasoned that the police were preventing

Johnson Majority Opinion” focuses on an actual court case based on a situation where a flag was burned. The people of Texas were outraged with Johnson. During the time of the case the people gained acceptance to allowing Johnson to be a free man.”The way to preserve the flag’s special role is not to punish those who feel differently about these matters. It is to persuade them that they are wrong.”, an excerpt from “Texas v. Johnson Majority Opinion”(line38), states that those who freely express unlawful thoughts shall not be prosecuted, but proven that what they’re expressing is unlawful.

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

“According to estimates from the 2013 ACS, the U.S. immigrant population stood at more than 41.3 million, or 13 percent, of the total U.S. population of 316.1 million. Between 2012 and 2013, the foreign-born population increased by about 523,000, or 1.3 percent. U.S. immigrants and their U.S.-born children now number approximately 80 million persons, or one-quarter of the overall U.S. population.”People for in other countries that come to America are known as immigrants. They can be categorized as illegal or legal immigrants. Recently there has been a case (Texas v. United States) which corresponds with immigration in the United States of America. Now, it is seen as inhumane to break up families in the United sates, It’s illegal for states to sue the U.S., and the general public does not need time to react to the new program in motion.

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."

Hernandez V. Texas is based in the 6th amendment, “guarantees a defendant a right to counsel in all criminal prosecutions”. This case is a very well-known because there was too much of discrimination towards Hispanics. Pedro Hernandez is a resident at Edna, Texas, a Mexican guy who was accused of convicting the murder of Joe Espinosa who was also a resident of the same area. Hernandez was found guilty by an all-white jury going all the way to Supreme Court. Their lawyers argue that it wasn’t fair for them not having a Mexican American as a jury and there was only Americans, because in that way they would take advantage of a Mexican American to do whatever they wanted to do with him. In the 1950’s was when this case occurred and also there was a harsh discrimination to Mexican Americans from the white people at the United States. Mexicans and African Americans were just a “waste of time” for the white people, that’s how the white people thought about them. History, discrimination and how did this issue impact police, court, and corrections are essential things that will be cover.

Brennan creates a tone that is serious, yet conciliatory in his court opinion for the “Texas v. Johnson” case to prove the Johnson should not go to prison. This is evident when he says “...Forbidding criminal punishment for conduct such as Johnson’s will not endanger the special role played by our flag or the feelings it inspires.” This quote uses a serious tone to show that someone burning a flag does not change the way

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.

As humans have to learn how to tolerate others diversity. It is important to accept others no matter how crazy it may sound to you. The lottery was about a small village that had a certain way of things and did the “lottery” every year, meaning you would pieces of paper and sorry not sorry but if you had a dot you were gonna get stoned by your friends and family and people you knew on a personal level. Texas v. Johnson Majority Opinion is about how people are getting kinda defensive about how others treat the flag. The Wife’s Story is about a family whom in the beginning we are lead to believe they are just a normal family but we soon realize they're not so normal after all. “The lottery”, “Texas v. Johnson Majority Opinion,” both support

The Supreme Court eventually came to the majority vote in favor of Gregory, considering his act a form of “Expression protected by the Constitution” (Brennan 15). The state of Texas is forced to accept that Gregory Lee Johnson is protected by the guidelines of our Constitution and they may look down upon the people that decide to burn our nation’s flag, but those that perform these acts cannot be jailed or fined.

The cases Snyder v. Phelps, all started when Westbora Baptist Church members held signs that stated, “Thank God for dead solders” and “Fag Troops” at Marine Lance Cpl. Matthew Snyder’s funeral. The family filed a lawsuit that first went to the lower court which they reserved $5 million in damages. But than the cases went to the Supreme Court and the First Amendment shields any protesters who stage a protest at a military funeral from liability. The Supreme Court had to rule in favor of the protesters because it is their job to protect religious expression under the First Amendment. [ "Snyder v. Phelps." Oyez, 23 Sep. 2017, www.oyez.org/cases/2010/09-751.]The decision was 8-to-1 which means that one person did not want the protesters to win the case but in the end they