Download Texas v. Johnson: Flag Desecration and Freedom of Speech and more Slides Management Fundamentals in PDF only on Docsity! Texas v. Johnson Decision: Wednesday, June 21, 1989 Issues: First Amendment, Protest Demonstrations Categories: criminal, first amendment, flag desecration, freedom of speech Tags: Rehnquist: Freedom of Speech, Rehnquist on iTunes U Facts of the Case In 1984, in front of the Dallas City Hall, Gregory Lee Johnson burned an American flag as a means of protest against Reagan administration policies. Johnson was tried and convicted under a Texas law outlawing flag desecration. He was sentenced to one year in jail and assessed a $2,000 fine. After the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals reversed the conviction, the case went to the Supreme Court. Question Is the desecration of an American flag, by burning or otherwise, a form of speech that is protected under the First Amendment? Conclusion In a 5-to-4 decision, the Court held that Johnson's burning of a flag was protected expression under the First Amendment. The Court found that Johnson's actions fell into the category of expressive conduct and had a distinctively political nature. The fact that an audience takes offense to certain ideas or expression, the Court found, does not justify prohibitions of speech. The Court also held that state officials did not have the authority to designate symbols to be used to communicate only limited sets of messages, noting that "[i]f there is a bedrock principle underlying the First Amendment, it is that the Government may not prohibit the expression of an idea simply because society finds the idea itself offensive or disagreeable." Docsity.com Freedom of Expression Assembly Freedom of assembly includes the right to protest, picket, or hold a demonstration. The right to establish groups of people with similar political interests, from political parties to the Ku Klux Klan, is protected under the First Amendment (NAACP v. Alabama, 1958). Docsity.com Right to Bear Arms The right to keep and bear arms is protected by the Second Amendment, but it has rarely been the subject of Supreme Court review. States have generally had wide latitude in restricting firearms as the Second Amendment has not been incorporated. In District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), however, the Supreme Court ruled that the Second Amendment did protect an individual's right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that firearm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. This case does not directly incorporate the Second Amendment (Washington, D.C. is governed by Congress and is not a state), but it suggests that such incorporation is likely in the future. Docsity.com
STU raaraare las
Question
1
Question
-
The End For Today! If you ask me anything I don't know, I'm not going to answer. Yogi Berra Docsity.com
