A Principle Greater Than The Flag

Given Mikey Fitz’s recent Guest Opinion in the Bucks County Courier Times a few days ago about introducing an amendment against flag burning, I think it’s appropriate to note that today is the 17th anniversary of the Supreme Court decision in Texas vs. Johnson that acknowledged flag burning as free speech (as I said previously, it’s stupid and insulting free speech, but free speech all the same).

As noted from this link:

The court found that, "Under the circumstances, Johnson's burning of the flag constituted expressive conduct, permitting him to invoke the First Amendment... Occurring as it did at the end of a demonstration coinciding with the Republican National Convention, the expressive, overtly political nature of the conduct was both intentional and overwhelmingly apparent." The court concluded that, while "the government generally has a freer hand in restricting expressive conduct than it has in restricting the written or spoken word," it may not "proscribe particular conduct because it has expressive elements."

Also…

The most contentious issue before the Court, then, was whether states possessed an interest in preserving the flag as a unique symbol of national identity and principles. Texas argued that desecration of the flag impugned its value as such a unique national symbol, and that the state possessed the power to prevent this result.

The court rejected this argument, finding that the state's interest depended on the specific meaning it had attached to the flag through the flag desecration statute. "If there is a bedrock principle underlying the First Amendment", the decision of the court read, "it is that the government may not prohibit the expression of an idea simply because society finds the idea itself offensive or disagreeable." The Court consequently affirmed the ruling of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals (i.e., the Court upheld the reversal of Johnson's conviction).

I read a story in USA Today yesterday about another Supreme Court ruling, and I’ll try to say more about that shortly.

Update 6/28: Sounds like Pat Leahy actually read this post (sure...I should live so long). And does anyone realize that, if Joe Lieberman had voted true to form, this would have passed? God, he must REALLY be desperate (but again, 14 Dems supported it...can this party be unified on ANYTHING??!!).