...Texas vs Johnson Analysis The name of case we are analyzing is the case of Texas vs Johnson. This events that lead to Johnson being brought to court was that he participated in an demonstration against then President Reagan’s policies. Once the political protest reached Dallas City Hall ,Johnson was then was handed an American Flag which he then doused in kerosene and set it alight, luckily, no one was harmed during this flag burning but some bystanders were seriously offended by the flag burning.This case was brought upon Gregory Lee Johnson as he was charged with desecration of a venerated object which violated the Texas Penal Code. He was then convicted and sentenced to one year in prison and received a fine $2,000. The original plaintiff...
Words: 727 - Pages: 3
...Texas v. Johnson, 491 U.S. 397, 1989 Procedural Background: Gregory Johnson appealed his conviction to the Court of Appeals and lost. Johnsons then proceeded to appeal his case to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals and they reversed the decision and the case was sent to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court viewed the case and overturned Johnson’s conviction. Facts: The defendant, Gregory Lee Johnson, took part in a demonstration that took place at the Republican National Convention in Texas in 1984. During a time in this nonviolent demonstration Johnson was given an American flag which he set on fire. Nobody was injured while the flag was burning, but Johnson was convicted of destroying a respected object. Johnson appealed his conviction and the Courts of Appeals for the Fifth District of Texas and lost. He then proceeded to take his case to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals and his conviction was overturned. The court contended that Johnson could not be punished for his exercising his right to free speech (the First Amendment). In 1989, the Supreme Court took the case and with a 5-4 vote affirmed the Texas Court of...
Words: 527 - Pages: 3
...Max McClellan 9/20/15 APUSH Schneider The Bill of Rights Supreme Court Cases Case 1: Texas vs. Johnson (1989) A.) Gregory Lee Johnson burned an American flag outside of the convention center where the 1984 Republican National Convention was being held in Dallas, Texas. Johnson burned the flag because he was angered by Reagan’s policies. He was arrested and charged with violating a Texas statute that prevented the desecration of a venerated object, including the American flag. A Texas court tried and convicted Johnson. He appealed, arguing that his actions were "symbolic speech" protected by the First Amendment. B.) Does the burning of the American flag constitute as "symbolic speech” which is protected by the First Amendment? C.) The burning of the flag was found to be considered as free speech which is protected by the First Amendment. D.) The majority of the court believed Johnson’s acts to be a representation of symbolic speech. While many might be angered by the action, Johnson’s right of free speech cannot be taken away. F.) Writing for the dissent, Justice Stevens argued that the flag's unique status as a symbol of national unity outweighed "symbolic speech" concerns so the government could lawfully prohibit flag burning. Case 2: Escobedo vs. Illinois (1964) A.) Danny Escobedo was arrested without a warrant for the murder of his...
Words: 1676 - Pages: 7
...Texas v. Johnson Supreme Court of the Unites States, 1989 491 U.S. 397. Facts: During the 1984 Republican National Convention, Gregory Lee Johnson burned an American flag to protest the policies of the Regan Administration and certain Dallas-based corporations while protesters chanted "America, the red, white, and blue, we spit on you." Although no one was physically harmed or threatened, many bystanders were deeply offended by the demonstration. He was arrested and convicted of violating a Texas statute that prevented the desecration of a venerated object if the action were expected to rouse anger in others. He was sentenced to one year in prison and fined $2,000. The Court of Appeals for the Fifth District of Texas affirmed the conviction; however, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals reversed it stating he could not be punished for his actions of obvious political nature in this circumstance. The case then went to the Supreme Court to...
Words: 552 - Pages: 3
...Have you ever read 3 stories that have put you in the mood? Well if you haven’t I’m just going to summarize 3 stories. The first story is titled “Texas v. Johnson Majority Opinion”. The second story is titled “The Lottery”. The last but not leased is titled “American flag stands for Tolerance. Texas v. Johnson Majority opinion was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States. American flag enforced in 48 of the 50 states. The way to preserve the flag is special role is not to punish those who feel differently about these matters. It is to persuade them that they are wrong. It is Nation’s resilience not its rigidity, the Texas sees reflected in the flag and it is that resilience that was reassert today. The Lottery is a small...
Words: 343 - Pages: 2
...Texas v. Johnson: The Flag Burning Case In 1984 outside of a Dallas, Texas, Gregory Johnson was protesting Ronald Reagan’s policies outside of the Republican National Convention. Johnson was a member of the Revolutionary Communist Youth Brigade, where members would gather and destroy property in an protest called “War Chest Tours.” As the members reached Dallas City Hall, Johnson poured kerosene on a stolen flag and burned it. Johnson was taken into custody and charged with violating a Texas law that prohibits the vandalization of respected objects. During his sentence, he appealed his conviction in the Fifth Court of Appeals of Texas which he lost, and then in the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, where his conviction was overturned because they said flag burning was protected under the first amendment. Since this sparked...
Words: 532 - Pages: 3
...Texas v. Johnson, 491 U.S. 397 (1989) Parties: Respondent Johnson, Petitioner Texas. Facts: Respondent participated in a demonstration at the Republican National Convention in Dallas, Texas in 1984. At one point during the demonstration, a fellow protestor handed Respondent an American flag and he set it on fire. Procedural History: After trial Respondent was convicted, sentenced to a year in prison and fined $2000. Respondent appealed his conviction, but lost in the Court of Appeals for the Fifth District of Texas. He then took his case to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. Respondent’s conviction was overturned; the court maintained that Respondent could not be punished for exercising a right to free speech that is protected by the First Amendment. Issue(s): Is burning a flag an act of protected free speech? Rules: First Amendment, free speech; United States v O’Brian, the First Amendment forbids the abridgment only of “speech,” but we have long recognized that its protection does not end at the spoken or written word, “view that an apparently limitless variety of conduct can be labeled ‘speech’ whenever the person engaging in the conduct intends thereby to express and idea.”; Spencer v Washington, we have acknowledged that conduct may be “sufficiently imbued with elements of communication to fall within the scope of the First and Fourteenth Amendments.” Analysis: The court considered the First Amendment and whether its free speech protection extended to include...
Words: 359 - Pages: 2
...CABRERA, CHIASSON, & HALL, LLP CERTIFIED ACCOUNTANTS • BUSINESS CONSULTANTS INDEPENDENT AUDITORS RECOMMENDATION ON COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT BURLESON, TX YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2014 AUDITORS ADBEEL CABRERA KIMBERLY CHIASSON CLIFTON HALL CITY OF BURLESON, TX AUDITOR’S REPORT We have audited the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report of the City of Burleson as well as conducted field inspections and additional independent research. Our responsibility is to express an opinion and recommend appropriate and efficient use of funds. ------------------------------------------------- DEMOGRAPHICS Nestled between Fort Worth and Cleburne along the Interstate 35W corridor, Burleson is a charming, growing community offering a unique blend of metropolitan, suburban, and rural living. Fort Worth is approximately twelve miles to the north and there are approximately 28,000 acres of undeveloped land within the city limits and ETJ (extra-territorial jurisdiction). The city is conveniently located within minutes of Interstate 35W, Interstate 20, and Hwy 67 making the location attractive to both businesses and citizens. The population of Burleson has increased 43.6% between 2005 and 2014 and is expected to increase another 59% by 2030. In 2014, 413 new home permits were issued with an average value over $201,000 and several new apartment complexes are being constructed. Burleson has a median age of 33, an education level of 14.2, and an unemployment rate...
Words: 1075 - Pages: 5
...to Legal Analysis and Writing Prof. Wendi Cline Kaplan University November 13, 2014 By, Heather Leigh Bradley 1. The case study references one state statute. Identify it and explain what it prohibits. “The case study of State vs. Johnson references one specific state statue, 42.09(a)(3) of the Texas Penal Code, Desecration of a Venerated Object. A person commits an offense if he/she intentionally or knowingly desecrates, a state or national flag. “Desecrate” means to deface, damage, destroy, vandalize and/or mistreat in a way that the actor knowingly will greatly offend one or more persons are like to observe or discover his/her action. This offense is a Class A misdemeanor “(Case Study Texas vs. Johnson, 2014). The statue prohibits intentionally or knowingly desecrating, destroying, damaging, burning, mistreating of a state or national flag in public that will seriously offend one or more persons and is witnessed by one or more persons. This statue was made to prohibit only flagrant acts of flag desecration that take place in a public setting or place (Case Study Texas vs. Johnson, 2014). 2. Which branch of government created the state statute? The state statue, 42.09(a)(3) of the Texas Penal Code, Desecration of a Venerated Object, was created under legislative branch. The State’s interest is to prevent a breach of peace by prohibiting certain acts of flag desecration have been considered to be unrelated to the suppression of freedom of...
Words: 985 - Pages: 4
...Case Study Shawn Padgett Kaplan University Case Study The statute referred to in the case of Texas vs. Johnson, 491 U.S. 397 (1989) is 42.09 (a) (3) in the Texas Penal Code. This statute, 42.09 (a) (3), created by the executive branch, prohibits the desecration of a venerable object”, (a) a person commits an offense if he knowingly or intentionally desecrates; (3) a state or national flag. To desecrate a venerable object is to destroy, deface, or physically mistreat in a way that the one doing the action will seriously offend one or more persons observing the action. This statute was inconsistent with the first amendment. (Texas vs. Johnson, 491 U.S. 397 (1989)) The parties involved in this case are the state of Texas and Gregory Lee Johnson. The citation for the United States Supreme Court’s decision on this case is, Texas vs. Johnson, 491 U.S. 391 (1989) (Burning of the flag at political protest rally.). There was three court that heard Johnsons case before reaching the United States Supreme Court. Ranking from the highest court to the lowest for this case is the Texas Criminal Court of Appeals, Texas Court of Appeals (5th District), and the Dallas County Criminal Court. Creating a law is done by Congress, which are called statutes, or court-made, also called case law. Laws can also be by anyone that wants to propose to Congress of an adoption of new law. Case laws are based on the judicial opinions, including decisions that interpret statutes. Statutory...
Words: 543 - Pages: 3
...Trump's views on Mexicans. Trump says that Mexican immigrants are all rapists and murderers. As he says this, we're wondering 'how is he allowed to say these things?' This raises the question, are bigoted speeches and expressions allowed in America, even if they're disgusting, and offensive? The answer, after many years of court cases and history, is yes, these speeches and rallies are protected rights. A precedent case made offensive acts protected under the first and fourteenth amendment. In Johnson vs Texas, the Supreme court ruled that Texas cannot jail and fine Johnson just because they find his demonstration offensive. Johnson burned an American flag in front of the Dallas City Hall, causing him to be sentenced to one year in jail and fined 2,00 dollars. Johnson appealed, and the case went to the supreme court, and the court ruled the case breaches the first amendment, so Johnson was freed. This was a landmark, because future cases of offensive...
Words: 579 - Pages: 3
...Max McClellan 9/20/15 APUSH Schneider The Bill of Rights Supreme Court Cases Case 1: Texas vs. Johnson (1989) A.) Gregory Lee Johnson burned an American flag outside of the convention center where the 1984 Republican National Convention was being held in Dallas, Texas. Johnson burned the flag to protest the policies of President Ronald Reagan. He was arrested and charged with violating a Texas statute that prevented the desecration of a venerated object, including the American flag. A Texas court tried and convicted Johnson. He appealed, arguing that his actions were "symbolic speech" protected by the First Amendment. The Supreme Court agreed to hear his case. B.) Does the burning of the American flag constitute as "symbolic speech” which...
Words: 1587 - Pages: 7
...Texa‘ Time‘ 09 NOV 2015 Texas vs. Mary Beth Supreme Court Case By DHRUV PEECHARA Texas vs. Mary Smith Supreme Court Case In 1984 the american flag was burned during a protest by Mary Smith. Mary Smith is considered a terrorist by the state of Texas because she said that she wanted to destroy the beliefs of all Americans right before dshe destroyed the flag. Texas wants to press charges against her the court states that Mary Smith is innocent because she didnt hurt any people, so she wasnt convicted of anything. The first amendment Freedom of speech and Press protects her. The witnesses of the flag burning offended many people, and also one person buried the remains of the flag in the backyard,and since he wasnt hurt physically no charges were pressed. International Moose Count Underway By BOB O’BOBSTON The UN-sponsored International Moose Census got off to a flying start today with hopes for an increase in the worldwide moose population compared to last year’s disapointing figures. Among the traditional early reporters were Egypt, returning figures of six moose, a twenty percent increase on 2011’s figures of five, and Uruguay whose moose population remains stable at eleven. According to Robbie McRobson, head of the UN Moose Preserva- tion Council, worldwide moose numbers are expected to grow markedly on last year due to the traditional moose strongholds of Canada and the United States, with the larger developing moose ecologies also poised ...
Words: 1326 - Pages: 6
...Nayef Al-Rodhan once said, “Divisive leaders emphasize our differences, but speak little of the dangers of isolationism.” Connections suffer immensely when isolation moves in. Sometimes we pay so much attention to each other’s differences that we forget about overcoming them. By focusing on what makes us different and not on what makes us the same, we allow isolationism to take over. Therefore, the connections we have are greatly influenced by the efforts we make in understanding ourselves and others. This idea is present in three resources I discovered in Sophomore English, including the majority opinion “Texas vs. Johnson”, the newspaper editorial “American Flag Stands for Tolerance”, and the TED talk “The Danger of a Single Story”. When...
Words: 942 - Pages: 4
...case of Fisher vs. Texas over the Affirmation Act and Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The University of Texas at Austin has been using race as a factor for the admissions process and Fisher has come to believe it diminished her chances of going to the school. The Affirmative Action Act is used to eliminate discrimination due to race and other variables. By using race as a variable to be admitted into their University, Texas has committed an unconstitutional policy because it breaks the Equal Protection Clause under the Fourteenth Amendment. The Equal Protection Clause states equal privileges for all United States citizens. The affirmative action act is the policy designed to help eliminate discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin in areas such as: businesses, education, and employment. Affirmative action was originally used to help the ongoing battle against racism towards African Americans. However, the term affirmative action was first used in President John F. Kennedy’s 1961 Executive Order 10925 which required “federal contractors to “take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed, and that the employees are treated during employment, without regard to their race, creed, color, or national origin.” ” In 1967 Lyndon Johnson expanded his executive order 11246 (the equivalent of Kennedy’s executive order) to include affirmative action to benefit women (Sykes). Fisher vs. The University of Texas at Austin is a...
Words: 1202 - Pages: 5
