Texas v Johnson

docx

School

University of North Texas *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

3201

Subject

Political Science

Date

Oct 30, 2023

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by 2014christian

Texas v. Johnson Christian D. Anderson Professor Jordan Russell CJUS 3201 2023 April 8

Texas v. Johnson The Case's Background In 1984, Gregory Lee Johnson attended the Republican National Convention in Dallas, Texas, where he participated in a political protest. Johnson torched a flag of the United States of America in front of the Dallas City Hall as part of the protest. He was found guilty of breaking the provision of the Texas Penal Code that bans the degradation of a cherished item, which includes the American flag. This provision was found to have been violated by him. Johnson was given a sentence of one year in prison and a fine of $2,000 for his offense. Johnson filed an appeal of his conviction, and the case that resulted, Texas v. Johnson, was eventually heard by the Supreme Court of the United States ( Dyer, 1990) . The question at the heart of this legal dispute was whether or not the act of burning an American flag qualifies as a kind of symbolic expression shielded from governmental interference by the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. Supreme Court's Ruling In a case decided by a narrow margin of 5-4, the Supreme Court of the United States determined that the act of burning the national flag constitutes a form of symbolic expression that is safeguarded by the First Amendment. Justice William J. Brennan Jr., writing for the majority, noted that the government does not have the authority to criminalize expressive behavior that does not jeopardize or destroy the flag because of the flag's distinctive significance as a symbol. The majority supported Brennan's opinion. According to the perspective held by the majority of those involved in the case, the government cannot lawfully prohibit anyone from disrespecting the flag since doing so would go

against the fundamental principles outlined in the First Amendment. According to Justice Brennan, the act of punishing the desecration of the flag does not serve to consecrate it. Instead, it weakens the very freedom that the flag symbolizes. Dissenting and Majority Opinions According to the majority opinion, burning the flag was a symbolic expression that the First Amendment safeguards. The argument put forth was that the act of burning the flag constituted a form of protest and did not present an immediate danger to the overall welfare of the nation. The assertion highlights the significance of the First Amendment in safeguarding dissenting expressions, and it ought to be maintained even in instances where it causes offense or surprise to the majority. Conversely, the dissenting viewpoint maintained that the First Amendment did not provide safeguard to persons who incinerated American flags. The divergent viewpoint contended that the flag represents a unifying emblem of the country and that permitting its defilement would erode the nation's principles. A further point raised in the minority opinion was that burning the flag was not an expression of free speech but a tangible act of devastation. Personal Opinion My stance aligns with the prevailing viewpoint in the case of Texas v. Johnson. The First Amendment of the United States Constitution is a pivotal component in protecting individual freedoms and enabling the expression of divergent opinions, regardless of their controversial or unpopular nature. The American flag holds significant symbolic value as a representation of the United States and its core principles. Nevertheless, it is a potent emblem that can be utilized to articulate opposition and objection.

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

The capacity to incinerate the flag as a means of symbolic communication constitutes a fundamental aspect of the liberty of speech. Although some may perceive flag burning as offensive or disrespectful, it is a minor sacrifice that upholds the more significant principles of free speech and personal freedom. The verdict rendered by the Supreme Court in Texas v. Johnson is widely regarded as a pivotal case in the discourse surrounding the interpretation and extent of the First Amendment. This highlights the significance of safeguarding dissenting or contentious discourse and maintaining the fundamental tenets of the United States Constitution. Reference Dyer, J. R. (1990). Texas v. Johnson: Symbolic speech and flag desecration under the first amendment. New Eng. L. Rev. , 25 , 895.