<< Chapter < Page Chapter >> Page >

In the 1960s, however, the Supreme Court’s rulings on free expression became more liberal, in response to the Vietnam War and the growing antiwar movement. In a 1969 case involving the Ku Klux Klan, Brandenburg v. Ohio , the Supreme Court found that only speech or writing that constituted a direct call or plan to imminent lawless action, an illegal act in the immediate future, could be suppressed; the mere advocacy of a hypothetical revolution was not enough.

Brandenburg v. Ohio , 395 U.S. 444 (1969).
The Supreme Court also found that various forms of symbolic speech    —wearing clothing like an armband that carried a political symbol or raising a fist in the air, for example—were subject to the same protections as written and spoken communication.

Burning the u.s. flag

Perhaps no act of symbolic speech has been as controversial in U.S. history as the burning of the flag ( [link] ). Citizens tend to revere the flag as a unifying symbol of the country in much the same way most people in Britain would treat the reigning queen (or king). States and the federal government have long had laws protecting the flag from being desecrated—defaced, damaged, or otherwise treated with disrespect. Perhaps in part because of these laws, people who have wanted to drive home a point in opposition to U.S. government policies have found desecrating the flag a useful way to gain public and press attention to their cause.

A photo of an American flag. The flag is on fire.
On the eve of the 2008 election, a U.S. flag was burned in protest in New Hampshire. (credit: modification of work by Jennifer Parr)

One such person was Gregory Lee Johnson , a member of various pro-communist and antiwar groups. In 1984, as part of a protest near the Republican National Convention in Dallas, Texas, Johnson set fire to a U.S. flag that another protestor had torn from a flagpole. He was arrested, charged with “desecration of a venerated object” (among other offenses), and eventually convicted of that offense. However, in 1989, the Supreme Court decided in Texas v. Johnson that burning the flag was a form of symbolic speech protected by the First Amendment and found the law, as applied to flag desecration, to be unconstitutional.

Texas v. Johnson , 491 U.S. 397 (1989).

This court decision was strongly criticized, and Congress responded by passing a federal law, the Flag Protection Act , intended to overrule it; the act, too, was struck down as unconstitutional in 1990.

United States v. Eichman , 496 U.S. 310 (1990).
Since then, Congress has attempted on several occasions to propose constitutional amendments allowing the states and federal government to re-criminalize flag desecration—to no avail.

Should we amend the Constitution to allow Congress or the states to pass laws protecting the U.S. flag from desecration? Should we protect other symbols as well? Why or why not?

Freedom of the press is an important component of the right to free expression as well. In Near v. Minnesota , an early case regarding press freedoms, the Supreme Court ruled that the government generally could not engage in prior restraint    ; that is, states and the federal government could not in advance prohibit someone from publishing something without a very compelling reason.

Near v. Minnesota , 283 U.S. 697 (1931).
This standard was reinforced in 1971 in the Pentagon Papers case, in which the Supreme Court found that the government could not prohibit the New York Times and Washington Post newspapers from publishing the Pentagon Papers .
New York Times Co. v. United States , 403 U.S. 713 (1971).
These papers included materials from a secret history of the Vietnam War that had been compiled by the military. More specifically, the papers were compiled at the request of Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara and provided a study of U.S. political and military involvement in Vietnam from 1945 to 1967. Daniel Ellsberg famously released passages of the Papers to the press to show that the United States had secretly enlarged the scope of the war by bombing Cambodia and Laos among other deeds while lying to the American public about doing so.

Questions & Answers

I'm interested in biological psychology and cognitive psychology
Tanya Reply
what does preconceived mean
sammie Reply
physiological Psychology
Nwosu Reply
How can I develope my cognitive domain
Amanyire Reply
why is communication effective
Dakolo Reply
Communication is effective because it allows individuals to share ideas, thoughts, and information with others.
effective communication can lead to improved outcomes in various settings, including personal relationships, business environments, and educational settings. By communicating effectively, individuals can negotiate effectively, solve problems collaboratively, and work towards common goals.
it starts up serve and return practice/assessments.it helps find voice talking therapy also assessments through relaxed conversation.
miss
Every time someone flushes a toilet in the apartment building, the person begins to jumb back automatically after hearing the flush, before the water temperature changes. Identify the types of learning, if it is classical conditioning identify the NS, UCS, CS and CR. If it is operant conditioning, identify the type of consequence positive reinforcement, negative reinforcement or punishment
Wekolamo Reply
please i need answer
Wekolamo
because it helps many people around the world to understand how to interact with other people and understand them well, for example at work (job).
Manix Reply
Agreed 👍 There are many parts of our brains and behaviors, we really need to get to know. Blessings for everyone and happy Sunday!
ARC
A child is a member of community not society elucidate ?
JESSY Reply
Isn't practices worldwide, be it psychology, be it science. isn't much just a false belief of control over something the mind cannot truly comprehend?
Simon Reply
compare and contrast skinner's perspective on personality development on freud
namakula Reply
Skinner skipped the whole unconscious phenomenon and rather emphasized on classical conditioning
war
explain how nature and nurture affect the development and later the productivity of an individual.
Amesalu Reply
nature is an hereditary factor while nurture is an environmental factor which constitute an individual personality. so if an individual's parent has a deviant behavior and was also brought up in an deviant environment, observation of the behavior and the inborn trait we make the individual deviant.
Samuel
I am taking this course because I am hoping that I could somehow learn more about my chosen field of interest and due to the fact that being a PsyD really ignites my passion as an individual the more I hope to learn about developing and literally explore the complexity of my critical thinking skills
Zyryn Reply
good👍
Jonathan
and having a good philosophy of the world is like a sandwich and a peanut butter 👍
Jonathan
generally amnesi how long yrs memory loss
Kelu Reply
interpersonal relationships
Abdulfatai Reply
What would be the best educational aid(s) for gifted kids/savants?
Heidi Reply
treat them normal, if they want help then give them. that will make everyone happy
Saurabh
Got questions? Join the online conversation and get instant answers!
Jobilize.com Reply

Get Jobilize Job Search Mobile App in your pocket Now!

Get it on Google Play Download on the App Store Now




Source:  OpenStax, American government. OpenStax CNX. Dec 05, 2016 Download for free at http://cnx.org/content/col11995/1.15
Google Play and the Google Play logo are trademarks of Google Inc.

Notification Switch

Would you like to follow the 'American government' conversation and receive update notifications?

Ask