Texas V. Johnson

Not an effective way to cook s'mores.

(l-to-r) Lawyer William Kunstler and Gregory Lee Johnson, c. 1989

We the People do ordain and establish this US Constitution

Standards of review

Rational basis review Intermediate scrutiny Strict scrutiny

Other legal theories

Substantive due process State action doctrine

Amendments

I - II - III - IV - V - XIV

Defining moments in law

Civil Rights Cases U.S. v. Virginia Hollingsworth v. Perry Youngstown Sheet and Tube Co. v. Sawyer Commerce Clause

Interpretation

Originalism Purposive Responsive Textualism

Issues

Civil rights Bill of Rights (United States) Gay rights Commerce rights Free speech v - t - e

Texas v. Johnson was a 1989 US Supreme Court case in which the Court determined that desecration of the American flag, even including burning, was a form of protected symbolic speech.^[1] This invalidated prohibitions against flag desecration that were enforced in a whopping 48 states.^[2]

Facts of the case[edit]

As part of a protest against the Reagan administration, Gregory Lee ("Joey") Johnson, outside the Republican National Convention in Dallas, doused an American flag in kerosene and lit that fucker up. Other demonstrators present chanted "America, the red, white, and blue, we spit on you."^[3] While no violence occurred, many witnesses were highly offended, and one man retrieved the flag's remains and buried them in his backyard according to military protocol.^[4]

Johnson was later charged with desecration of a venerated object by Texas courts, fined $2,000, and sentenced to a year in prison.^[5] After the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals reversed the decision, the case made its way to the Supreme Court.

Decision of the Court[edit]

Johnson's appeal was based on the idea that his actions were "symbolic speech" and thus protected by the First Amendment. In a controversial 5-4 decision, the Court, including Chief Justice Brennan agreed with Johnson and overturned his sentence.^[5] The majority decision noted that protecting freedom of speech often means defending actions and words that society finds offensive and that general outrage is not strong enough reason to suppress speech.^[6] Both dissents to the case cited the American flag as a uniquely important symbol in American culture which justifies special protections.^[6] Justice Stevens explained that he viewed the flag as " a symbol of freedom, of equal opportunity, of religious tolerance, and of good will for other peoples who share our aspirations. ... The value of the flag as a symbol cannot be measured."^[7]

See also[edit]

• Flag police
• Revolutionary Communist Party (US) — Johnson was a member at the time of the flag burning

External links[edit]

• Supreme Court of the United States Texas v. Johnson
• Without free speech, this island seethes with resentment UK citizens do not have the same freedom at least their freedom can be restricted.
• Flag-burning law plan criticised They tried unsuccessfully to introduce a law in the UK in 2007. Will they try again?

References[edit]