7/31/2019 texasvjohnson

1/1

Rexburg- we have the right to burn the US Constitution, but if you want to burn the flag then you

will be convicted of desecrating it and will be prosecuted. That is if the state of Texas has its

way. At the 1984 Republican National Convention, a member of the Revolutionary Communist

Youth Brigade doused a stolen American Flag with lighter fluid and burned it in public. The

State of Texas charged and convicted Gregory Lee Johnson with violating a Texas law that

prohibits vandalizing respected objects (desecration of a venerated object).The State of Texas was victorious with proving the point that venerated objects such as

the flag, cannot be publicly desecrated. So, it is with the American flag. It is more than a proud

symbol of the courage, the determination, and the gifts of nature that transformed 13 fledgling

Colonies into a world power. It is a symbol of freedom, of equal opportunity, of religious

tolerance, and of good will for other peoples who share our aspirations. The symbol carries its

message to dissidents both at home and abroad who may have no interest at all in our national

unity or survival. Justice Steven.

The victory however, was short lived even though Johnson failed his first conviction

appeal attempt, the second to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals proved to be most

advantageous. As the decision was that the State could not punish Johnson as he was

protected by the first amendment. The State of Texas chose to take the case to the US

Supreme Court, where the decision thrust the case into a landmark status now known as Texas

V. Johnson. The oral argument reveals that Kathy Alyce Drew representing the State of Texas,

failed at explaining why the American flag cannot be destroyed in public, and even received

humiliating comments from an unknown justice as he indicated Drew should protect the state

flower as well. Another justice brought up the point that cross is a religious symbol, but is not

protected by law. Drew responded to each of the comments but was unsuccessful in winning

support of a majority of the justices, and controversial 5-4 decision was handed down in favor of

Johnson.

In the controversial 5-4 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 fellinto 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."

http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1O51-TexasvJohnson.html

http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1988/1988_88_155/argument

http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/texasvjohnson.html