Texas v. Johnson

Definition

Texas v. Johnson was a landmark Supreme Court case decided in 1989 that addressed the issue of flag burning as a form of free speech under the First Amendment. The Court ruled that burning the American flag in protest is a protected form of expressive conduct, reinforcing the idea that freedom of speech includes actions that may be offensive or controversial. This decision highlighted the balance between protecting individual rights and respecting national symbols.

5 Must Know Facts For Your Next Test

1. The case arose when Gregory Lee Johnson burned an American flag during a protest at the 1984 Republican National Convention in Dallas, Texas.
2. Johnson was convicted under Texas law for desecrating a venerated object, but he appealed his conviction on First Amendment grounds.
3. The Supreme Court ruled in a 5-4 decision that flag burning is a form of symbolic speech protected by the First Amendment.
4. The majority opinion, written by Justice William Brennan, stated that the government cannot prohibit expression simply because it is offensive to some people.
5. This ruling reaffirmed the principle that freedom of speech extends beyond spoken or written words to include actions and expressions that convey political messages.

Review Questions

• How did the Supreme Court's ruling in Texas v. Johnson impact the interpretation of symbolic speech in relation to free speech rights?
  • The Supreme Court's ruling in Texas v. Johnson significantly expanded the interpretation of symbolic speech under free speech rights by affirming that actions like flag burning are protected forms of expression. The decision emphasized that individuals have the right to express their views, even through acts that may be deemed disrespectful or offensive to national symbols. This case set a precedent for how similar forms of protest could be viewed legally, reinforcing the idea that free speech encompasses a wide range of expressive conduct.
• Discuss how Texas v. Johnson illustrates the tension between protecting individual rights and maintaining respect for national symbols.
  • Texas v. Johnson exemplifies the ongoing tension between protecting individual rights and upholding respect for national symbols. The Supreme Court recognized that while many may view flag burning as an affront to patriotism, safeguarding free expression is a fundamental principle in a democratic society. The ruling acknowledged that freedom of speech can include controversial and polarizing actions, highlighting the importance of protecting dissenting opinions even when they challenge societal norms or values.
• Evaluate the broader implications of Texas v. Johnson on future cases involving free speech and governmental regulation, especially regarding content neutrality.
  • The broader implications of Texas v. Johnson on future cases involving free speech lie in its reinforcement of content neutrality principles in governmental regulation. By ruling that flag burning is protected under the First Amendment, the Court set a standard that any regulation must not favor one viewpoint over another based solely on its content. This case serves as a reference point for evaluating laws and policies affecting expressive conduct, emphasizing that government must tread carefully when regulating speech to avoid infringing on constitutional rights, which has been influential in subsequent rulings involving various forms of protest and expression.

Related terms

First Amendment:

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution protects freedoms concerning religion, expression, assembly, and the right to petition.

Symbolic Speech:

Symbolic speech refers to actions that express an opinion or message without spoken words, such as flag burning or wearing armbands.

Content Neutrality: Content neutrality is the legal doctrine that government regulations of speech must not discriminate based on the content or viewpoint of the speech.