The Opposing case of Texas v. Johnson

The Supreme Court’s decision on the case of Texas v. Johnson has been a controversial one, as it involves the burning of our national symbol, the American flag. It leads to the question: Does the desecration of the American flag a way of expressing speech that is protected by the first amendment? Shouldn't the destruction of a true American symbol be protected and preserved, as it is a symbol that represents our country? There is a great amount of criticism that Texas v. Johnson has been faced with; most of which are valid points that could contribute to possibly overriding this decision of Texas v. Johnson in the future. August 22, 1984, marked the day of the 1984 Republican National Convention in Dallas, Texas. Gregory Lee Johnson was part of a political demonstration that involved marching through the streets and shouting chants while holding signs up at the same time. Johnson was handed an American flag from another protester, which then led Johnson to proceed to pour kerosene on the flag and burn it. Johnson was then arrested under a Texas law that outlawed flag desecration, and he was sentenced to one year in jail and a $2000 fine. Johnson later appealed to the Fifth Court of Appeals of Texas, and then the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, which then overturned his conviction of this crime, stating that the State of Texas could not punish Johnson for burning the flag because of the First amendment, which protects certain activities such as symbolic speech. The State of Texas asked the Supreme Court to hear the case. June 21, 1989 marks the day of a landmark 5-4 decision of the United States Supreme court. The Court said that Gregory Lee Johnson’s burning of the American flag was protected expression under the First Amendment. They found that Johnson’s actions were expressive conduct, and had a distinctively political nature. Even though an audience of people takes offense to certain ideas or expression that they detest, the Court found that it does