Supreme Court Cases Period 1 Fall 2015
t3jDlD
t3jDlD
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