SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES ________________________________________ 491 U.S. 397 Texas v. Johnson CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS ________________________________________ No. 88-155 Argued: March 21‚ 1989 --- Decided: June 21‚ 1989 This case analysis of Texas v. Gregory Lee Johnson was a Supreme Court case that overthrew bans on damaging the American flag in 48 of the 50 states. Gregory Lee Johnson participated in a political demonstration during the 1984
Premium First Amendment to the United States Constitution Supreme Court of the United States
In this portion of the case‚ we are focused on the reasons for the United States District Court’s decision to deny the emergency motion for a stay brought by the United States government. The motion in question was in response to the enforcement of a temporary restraining order (TRO) filed together by Washington and Minnesota; or collectively‚ "the States". The TRO restricts the enforcement of President Trump’s executive order widely known as the "Travel Ban" or "Muslim Ban". The executive order
Premium United States President of the United States Terrorism
would incorporate his displeasure to the Sedition Act and also to the Federalists. At the first part of the excerpt‚ George Hay started his argument with a very strong opinion about the limitation that the Sedition Act of 1798 had put on the Americans to freely voice out their opinions about the government. He said that according to the constitution‚ it clearly stated that we‚ as a citizen of the United States‚ have a freedom of the press to be exercised when needed‚ and this Sedition Act was unconstitutionally
Premium First Amendment to the United States Constitution Law
In the twenty-first century society has found lots of things to argue over. In the US especially‚ people are concerned with the moral aspects involved in touchy subjects such as stem-cell research‚ gay marriage‚ and even more recently terrorist interrogation methods. On-going debates rage in all of these subjects and a question arises: should we‚ the people of the United States‚ allow or frown upon the very thought of them? Censorship is another current debate that takes on many forms. Censorship
Premium First Amendment to the United States Constitution Freedom of speech Supreme Court of the United States
Hollywood Ten Decades ago‚ in the later part of the 1940’s and 1950’s‚ Americans were very fearful about the ideas of communism spreading to the United States. Considering this‚ they launched a system allowing them to investigate alleged disloyalty; they called this the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC). Their initial plan was to step up its efforts to expose and eliminate communist in the American society. In addition to focusing on labor unions‚ government officials‚ and militaries’
Premium United States United States Constitution World War II
implementing campaign finance reform is the constitutional issue of free speech. Article I‚ section 4‚ and Article II‚ section 1‚ of the United States Constitution authorizes Congress to regulate federal elections. However‚ any regulations must conform to restraints imposed by the First Amendment to the Constitution. The courts have repeatedly held that‚ under the First Amendment‚ campaign contributions are protected as political free speech. Opponents to campaign finance reform believe that reforms will
Premium United States Constitution Political corruption First Amendment to the United States Constitution
“A well regulated Militia‚ being necessary to the security of a free State‚ the right of the people to keep and bear Arms‚ shall not be infringed” (Madison‚ 1791). What does that statement mean? Is it even open to interpretation? Should it be viewed as an individual right to possess firearms‚ or should it be believed that firearms should only be possessed in times of crisis? What is the definition of a crisis? A criminal trying to steal personal property or harm a life is a crisis in most people’s
Premium Supreme Court of the United States United States Bill of Rights Firearm
explicit material. The Bill of Rights and the First Amendment exists to protect speech and press that is unpopular. "Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression (Steele)." If unpopular ideas did not exist‚ we would not need the First Amendment. The right to bear arms is so commonly challenged that it has its own name: gun control. Banning weapons not for "legitimate" sporting purposes is a misuse of the right to bear arms amendment. "If the need for defense arises‚ it will not be
Premium First Amendment to the United States Constitution Obscenity Freedom of speech
affirmed the decision of the lower court. The respondent then petitioned for discretionary review by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. This court then reversed the decision finding Johnson’s flag burning to be “symbolic speech” protected by the First Amendment. Certiorari was granted. The case went to the Supreme Court. Statement of Facts The respondent‚ Johnson‚ participated in a political demonstration outside the republican national convention in Dallas in 1984. Approximately100 protestors demonstrated
Premium Supreme Court of the United States United States United States Constitution
once said‚ “A democracy cannot be both ignorant and free.” The first amendment structured to give United States citizens the right to speak freely is an essential law that builds the foundation of the United States Constitution. The first amendment is one of the most controversial laws that higher instructions of learning‚ churches‚ state‚ and local governments have debated for several centuries. So the question is should the United States government place a measure to regulate people from hateful language
Premium Freedom of speech United States Lyndon B. Johnson