05.01.2016 Views

Supreme Court Cases Period 1 Fall 2015

t3jDlD

t3jDlD

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

By: Amber Baldwin<br />

Texas v. Johnson (1989)<br />

Background Information<br />

In 1984, Gregory Lee Johnson burned an American flag while protesting Reagan administration policies. For violating a Texas<br />

law against flag desecration, he was sentenced to a $2000 fine and a year in jail. The Texas <strong>Court</strong> of Criminal Appeals reversed<br />

the decision before it went to the <strong>Supreme</strong> <strong>Court</strong>.<br />

Constitutional Issue(s)<br />

Does Johnson’s burning of the American flag count as a form of expression that must be protected under the First<br />

Amendment’s freedom of speech?<br />

<strong>Supreme</strong> <strong>Court</strong> Decision (Majority Opinion)<br />

The justices ruled 5-4 that Johnson’s action was a form of self expression and must be protected by the First Amendment. Even<br />

if something is offensive, that does not permit infringement of freedom of speech.<br />

Precedent<br />

Self-expressive actions cannot be criminalized based only on personal offense.<br />

Concurring Opinion(s)<br />

Justice Kennedy agreed with the majority opinion and wanted to add that even<br />

though they are reluctant to let him go free, it is on a philosophical basis that<br />

he would be imprisoned. He said that the flag protects even those who hold it<br />

in contempt.<br />

____________________________________________<br />

|* * * * * *|________________________________|<br />

| * * * * * |________________________________|<br />

|* * * * * *|________________________________|<br />

| * * * * * |________________________________|<br />

|* * * * * *|________________________________|<br />

| * * * * * |________________________________|<br />

|* * * * * *|________________________________|<br />

| * * * * * |________________________________|<br />

|* * * * * *|________________________________|<br />

|-----------|________________________________|<br />

|___________________________________________|<br />

|___________________________________________|<br />

|___________________________________________|<br />

Dissenting Opinion(s)<br />

Justice Rehnquist believed that the flag has a uniqueness that justifies prohibition against burning it. They believed that<br />

because it is the symbol of the nation, it is a special case and that it is Constitutional to ban desecration of it.<br />

Sources Cited (MLA)<br />

"Texas v. Johnson." Oyez. Chicago-Kent College of Law at Illinois Tech, n.d. Dec 8, <strong>2015</strong>.<br />

"Texas v. Johnson." Www.law.cornell.edu. Legal Information Institute. Web. 8 Dec. <strong>2015</strong>.<br />

Quick Links<br />

<br />

https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/491/397#writing-USSC_CR_0491_0397_ZC<br />

18 | Page

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!