Texas Vs Johnson Case

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.

Our first amendment to the United States Constitution reads; Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the

When the U.S. declared it is independence from the British the American flag became a symbol of freedom. Today's flag has fifty stars representing each state and thirteen stripes representing the 13 colonies, and it is an example of Americans’ values, hope and liberty. On August 22, 1984, Gregory Lee Johnson, a political activist, and other activist went on a march in Dallas Texas during the Republican National Convention. They went to protest the policies of the Reagan administration. When they arrived the Dallas City Hall Johnson doused an American flag with kerosene, and he set it on fire while the other people shouted, “American, the red, white, and blue, we spit on you was reported by Texas v. Johnson article.” There are several significant aspects in the case of Johnson v Texas including the Johnson’s conviction in the Dallas Country Criminal Court, Johnson’s appeal to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals and the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court.

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” ().

the trial and court case shows that if johnson wouldnt have burned a flag he wouldn't have showed that even symbolic speech should be protected under the first amendment. “We do not consecrate the flag by punishing its desecration, for in doing so we dilute the freedom that this cherished emblem represents.” If johnson would have been punished to the fullest extent then it would've been the opposite of what the American flag stands for which is freedom. “The court first found that Johnson's burning of the flag was expressive conduct protected by the First Amendment.” He was expressing his opinion to society which should matter.

Texas v. Johnson took place in 1989. The historical significance of the Supreme Court’s decision is that the burning of an American flag is a protected form of speech under the First Amendment. The case originated after Johnson burned the United States flag during a protest. Johnson was arrested, sentenced to one year in prison, and fined $2,000. Johnson appealed his case to the appeals court in Texas but lost. Johnson’s case then went to the Court of Criminal Appeals in Texas which lead to the overturning of Johnson’s conviction.

In 1984, Gregory Lee Johnson, while in a protest, burned an american flag in front of the convention center in Dallas, Texas. In the convention center the Republican National Convention was taking place. Johnson burned the flag because he was in disagreement with the policies of President Ronald Reagan. The policies Johnson disagreed with were President Reagan's nuclear policies. Due to Johnson’s actions, Johnson was placed under arrest. Johnson was charged with violating a Texas law. This law prohibits the desecration of the American flag.

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.

In 1984, in front of the Dallas City Hall, the defendant Gregory Johnson and the Revolutionary Communist Youth Brigade protested the Reagan administration policies. During this protest, Johnson burned an American flag on the steps of city hall. Johnson was arrested, tried, and convicted of violating a Texas law that outlawed the desecration or destruction of the United States flag. Johnson was sentenced to one year in jail and had to pay a $2,000 fine. Johnson appealed the conviction stating that the Texas law was a violation of his first amendment right to freedom of speech. He lost his first appeal in the Fifth Court of Appeals of Texas. However, his second appeal to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals reversed the conviction. Texas then

The first amendment states,”People have the freedom of religion, speech, press; and the right to assemble peacefully and petition the government.”

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.

Burning the United States of America flag should be protected under the First Amendment right. The first reason is because burning the flag does not destroy or damage the system of freedom and the meaning the flag represents. According to article 1, retired General Colin Powell’s letter to Senator Leahy, he states that if it is their own flag there should not be punishments, however, if it is someone else's then it should be a punishable crime. Having the freedom to their own property further enforces the meaning and value the flag stands for in the first amendment right. Moreover, it is their own property and they should have the rights to exercise their first amendment right. Another reason is because the act of expressing one's expression

The first amendment is the prohibition of making any law respecting an establishment of religion, impending the free exercise of religion, abridging freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering with

To start with, in the “Texas v. Johnson Majority Opinion”. The court case shows an example of acceptance towards Johnson. He was on trial due to burning the flag. Many people thought his actions were unacceptable and that he be placed in jail as a result of his dissent. Brennan, who served the supreme court, decided that his actions were protected under the 1st amendment, a dogma that grants him freedom of assembly and freedom of speech in this case. Brennan argued,” The way to pressure the flag’s special role is not to punish those who feel differently about these matters. It’s to persuade them that they are wrong.” America was founded on freedom and acceptance, and this case supports that fact. Even though

As times change, so do our cultural expectations and sociological acceptable norms. The image in the link provided above captures a peace sign printed on the American Flag, which is being raised during a strong anti-war protest in Washington, D.C. (Vietnam: Anti-War Protests 1). This distortion of the flag captures the citizen’s opposing views towards U.S. involvement in Southeast Asia. During the 70s, the defacing of an American flag to express unity and tranquility would have been an acceptable and powerful statement against the brutality and the turmoil of the Vietnam War (Levy 5). In today’s world, this defacement would violate the Flag Protection act of 1990, which is a result of Texas v. Johnson, a supreme court case in 1989 regarding