During the Republican National Convention of 1984 held in Dallas, Texas, protesters voiced their strong opinions against the former president Ronald Reagan. One of protesters, known as Gregory Lee Johnson, set an American flag on flames in order to express his opinions. The Texas law enforcement arrested him due to the fact he broke a state law which prohibits the burning of the American flag. Johnson appealed and escalated the case up to the federal Supreme Court. In 1989, The Supreme Court decided that the burning of the American flag was an act of one’s freedom of speech and that it was supported by the Constitution. They rationalised that no one should be penalised or prosecuted for utilising the universal rights that are central to …show more content…
This system reflects Texas’ retaliation against Johnson because they are discriminating one expression of one’s ideology through the means of a double standard. Unfortunately, this course of action is unconstitutional and attempts to abolish the rights of the first amendment to some individuals due to ideological differences in expression.
Criticism, scepticism, and scrutiny against one’s country is a key component of the democratic system of government. If we are penalised or prosecuted for criticising or scrutinising our governmental officials or our nation’s current state, we have failed to preserve essential democratic ideals. The governmental suppression against those who scrutinise them is a trait found in doctoral and authoritarian societies. These include Persia under Xerxes, imperial China under the Qin dynasty, England under King Henry VII, Germany under Hitler, the Soviet Union under Stalin, socialist China under Mao, North Korea under Kim Jong Un and a multiplicity of many more societies. The common trait between each society is the fact that they all suppressed any form of criticism or scrutiny. For a supposedly democratic nation, the Texas government seems to be appropriating concepts from doctoral and authoritarian societies in order to suppress any unconventional or controversial expressions of criticism. This is not a positive direction which the United States is heading towards
In 1989 the United States Supreme Court ruled that burning the American flag was a form of symbolic speech and therefore was protected by the United States Constitution. What would happen if they took away the right of freedom of speech? How would people express their feelings and emotions towards the government? Many people would feel as though the government was attacking the basis of one of our nation's strongest beliefs. Many would argue over this situation. Protestors would raise all sorts of questions. What is a free nation that does not allow political disagreement? What is a free nation that will not allow itself to be spoken out against? What is a free nation that wants to punish those who oppose its hypocritical principals?
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.
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
This case analysis of Texas v. Gregory Lee Johnson was a Supreme Court case that overthrew bans on damaging the American flag in 48 of the 50 states. Gregory Lee Johnson participated in a political demonstration during the 1984 Republican National Convention in Dallas, Texas, where he burned the American flag. Consequently, Johnson was charged with violating the Texas law that bans vandalizing valued objects. However, Johnson appealed his conviction, and his case
In 1984 in front of the Dallas City Hall during the Republican National Convention, respondent Gregory Lee Johnson participated in a political demonstration to protest the policies of the Reagan administrations and some Dallas-bound corporations. Johnson proceeded with burning an American flag in protest against the policies, where Reagan sought to stimulate the economy with large tax cuts. Johnson was tried and convicted, under Texas law, of the desecration of a venerated object. The State Court of Appeals affirmed the actions, until the case advanced to the Supreme Court after the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals reversed the conviction, holding that the State (consistent with the First Amendment) could not punish Johnson
In the year 1984-1989 there was a case that struck America and shows a very good example to having your first amendment rights, not everyone will necessarily agree with this but this is how Mr. Johnson took his actions against the supreme court. This case is based on Mr. Johnson feeling violated against his first amendment right and standing up for himself and burning the American flag. Many patriotic people would completely disagree with this but, in our first amendment we have the freedom of speech and freedom of expression. Leading Mr. Johnson to this case because the American flag is supposed to represent our country and our freedom. “Gregory Lee Johnson burned an American flag outside of the convention center where the 1984 Republican National Convention was being held in Dallas, Texas. Johnson burned the flag to protest the policies of President Ronald Reagan. He was arrested and charged with violating a Texas statute that prevented the desecration of a venerated object, including the American flag, if such action were likely to incite anger in others. A Texas court tried and convicted Johnson. He appealed, arguing that his actions were "symbolic speech" protected by the First Amendment.” Based off this case with this evidence this shows how much this could affect Mr. Johnson and the public significantly.
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.
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.
On August 22nd, 1984 Gregory Lee Johnson was arrested on the grounds of desecrating the American flag in downtown Dallas, Texas. His trial was held roughly three months later, where Johnson was then convicted of the crime, sentenced to one year in prison, and forced to pay a fine (Goldstein 37). After a series of appeal attempts, the decision of Johnson’s case was finally reviewed by the Texas Court of Appeals in 1988 and was then overturned. The court of appeals said that Johnson’s actions were protected by his 1st amendment right to freedom of speech. Texas then took that ruling to the Supreme Court where they ruled again in Johnson’s favor saying that Texas’ law against flag desecration was unconstitutional and violated first amendment rights.
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.
It is against the Constitution of the U.S.A as well as any laws whether state, federal and international that seeks to protect everyone and ensure that rights are equally distributed. However, this has been ironic of Texas’s
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
fact the profound regard for the flag created by history when it enacts statues prohibiting
“The Congress shall have power to prohibit the physical desecration of the flag of the United States (Corn-Revere).” This quote shows the controversy of the First Amendment in the Bill of Rights. Many people today believe that the freedom to express their opinions is a founding principle that can never be taken away. In order to understand Flag Burning, one must interpret and analyze the Constitution and the First Amendment.
Allowing the government to eliminate private speech using the defense of protecting its image, brand, or desired message the government can apply this defense in an overwhelming plethora of situations2. Pleasant Grove City v. Summum set the standard for the government speech doctrine low by not requiring the state to prove it was trying to convey a specific massage before denying the right to freedom of speech to citizens2. Pleasant Grove City v. Summum with the addition of Walker v. Texas will likely result in the assertion of the government speech doctrine in a wider variety of situations as a platform for censoring and denying private speech. Papandrea warns about speech restrictions that will soon be forced on college athletes, public school teachers, and government employees due to the analysis of Walker v.