State of Texas vs. Johnson (1989)

4.9 of 5.0 (4 reviews)

Download now!

Contains
646 words

Category
Politics

State of Texas vs. Johnson (1989) Page 1

State of Texas vs. Johnson (1989) Page 2

State of Texas vs. Johnson (1989) Page 3

State of Texas vs. Johnson (1989) Page 4

State of Texas vs. Johnson (1989) Page 5

The above thumbnails are of reduced quality. To view the work in full quality, click download.

State of Texas vs. Johnson (1989)

Justice Viveiros delivers the opinion of the court:

Gregory Lee Johnson has been convicted of desecrating a flag

in violation of Texas law; a conviction which questions ones

guaranteed First Amendment, constitutional rights. Johnson's

involvement in a political demonstration in Dallas, lead him to

express his political concerns with the nations leaders and

governmental policies. The State of Texas' conviction of Johnson

was carried out due to Johnson's conduct, a physically expressive act,

rather than a written or spoken one and based on two criteria: a

responsibility to preserve the integrity of the flag representing the

strength, pride and unity of our nation and whether Johnson's actions

threatened societal order and peace. Both criteria, which serve as the

basis for Gregory Lee Johnson's conviction, have been explored in

depth, and this court concludes the following...

Johnson's form of political expression did not cause societal

disorder or disrupt the peace. There were no violent outbreaks, either

verbal or physical, from members of Johnson's protest, or other

citizens, who may view flag burning as a distasteful, ungrateful, slap

in the face of our nation. However, the State of Texas has already

acknowledged this fact. The State ruled that regardless of the lack of

evidence that Johnson's actions have threatened societal order and

public peace, on account there were no such occurrences, flag burning

has the potential to do so. The State has concluded that flag burning

could: first, stir up people's emotions enough, possibly resulting in

intense public arguments, violent physical disputes, or riots, and

second, serves as an invitation for others to take political protests

to the next level, which could be dangerous.

The States decision brings up two questions, is flag burning

as a form of political protest an agreeable method of practicing ones

First Amendment rights, or an attempt to persuade others to take the

act beyond the rights of citizens to more serious and dangerously,

harmful, acts of protest?, and does the State have the right to claim

that Johnson's conduct had the potential or indented to cause a

violent encounter with passionate opposition to flag burning, even if

the act did not do so?

Johnson is an individual, responsible for his own actions, not

the actions of others. He has chosen to practice his First Amendment

rights, by expressing his disapproval of government leadership and

polices, by publicly burning and American flag. It is this courts

decision that Johnson has not intended to encourage others to take

more drastic approaches of protesting government. Johnson can not be

accountable for wrongful impressions of his intentions.

The State has allowed itself power not granted by the United

States Constitution, by convicting Johnson for an act that potentially

causes violent confrontations. Had publicly burning a flag caused a

fight or rioting, this would be an entirely different case. However,

the fact remains, the protest resulted in no such event. There is also

no evidence that Johnson intended his protest to provoke societal

disorder. Again, the State has not the right to base charges of

Johnson's intentions with no evidence, only expressing concerns of the

potential negative effects of Johnson's actions.

The State's conviction is therefore ...

You are currently seeing 50% of this paper.

You're seeing 646 words of 1292.

Read the full essay

Keywords: texas vs. johnson (1989), what is the texas vs johnson court case about, texas v. johnson (1989

Similar essays

The Case Against Capital Punis

By: John H. Whitehead E-mail: johnhwhitehead@hotmail.com John H. Whitehead Professor Roth Whitehead 1 A Moratorium on The Death Penalty Should Be Enacted In Illinois Due to the recent releases of newly exonerated Death Row inmates, individuals and organizations are calling for a moratorium- a cooling off period for state executions. The c...

209 reviews

Download

Affirmative Action and its Eff

ects The roots of affirmative action can be traced back to the passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act where legislation redefined public and private behavior. The act states that to discriminate in private is legal, but anything regarding business or public discrimination is illegal ("Affirmative" 13). There are two...

104 reviews

Download

Gambling Addiction

By: Luke Forehand E-mail: rallyround@hotmail.com Picture this situation: A man who is having problems at home and is low on cash decides to go to a casino and try his luck. He places small bets at first, wins a few times, and feels great. Eventually the risk becomes too little for him, and he begins to bet more. He begins losing the bigg...

82 reviews

Download

Atomic Diplomacy

The emergence of the United States as a dominant party in balance of power equations is a relatively new phenomenon in world history. New military technology coupled with increased global integration has allowed the United States to reinvent the fundamental assumptions of international diplomacy while propelling itself to the top of the h...

18 reviews

Download

Appalacian Regional Commission

& Poverty in Appalachia THE APPALACHIAN REGIONAL COMMISSION AND POVERTY IN APPALACHIA By Brent M. Pergram, Master of Arts in Sociology I. INTRODUCTION Appalachia, as defined in the legislation from which the Appalachian Region Commission derives its authority, is a 200,000 square mile region that follows the spine of the Appalachian...

202 reviews

Download