It was argued together with the case united states v. William kunstler second from left, discusses the supreme court ruling to declare the flag protection act of 1989 unconstitutional at a press conference monday. Citations are generated automatically from bibliographic data as a convenience, and may not be complete or accurate. Supreme court struck down the flag protection act of 1989 on first amendment grounds, reaffirming its holding in texas v. District court for the southern district of new york. Lexis 3087 brought to you by free law project, a nonprofit dedicated to creating high quality open legal information. Johnson, which invalidated on first amendment grounds a texas state statute banning flag burning.
Mills, individually and in her official capacity as attorney general for the state of. Both the united states district court for the western district of washington, 731 f. Capitol while protesting the governments domestic and foreign policy. Indicate your opinion below and click submit to see what other participants have said. Johnson demonstrate that reasonable judges may differ with respect to each of these judgments.
It built on the opinion handed down in the courts decision the prior year in texas v. Johnson, which invalidated a texas flag desecration statute. Haggerty resulted from a flagburning in seattle protesting the passage of the flag protection act. Amendment supporters regularly cite publicopinion surveys that indicate that 75. The individual interest is unquestionably a matter of great. In the supreme court of the united states andrew march, petitioner, v. Congress, recognizing that johnson and eichman had left little hope of an antidesecration statute being upheld. What do you think of the supreme court ruling in united states v. Eichman, that struck down the state and federal flag protection. Shawn eichman burned the flag to protest the united states oppression of women and. Eichman and others were prosecuted under the federal flag protection act for setting fire to american flags. Eichman and the others stated that the act violated the first amendment, and courts in washington state and in the district of columbia agreed.
605 268 344 1399 839 407 155 1037 585 226 1220 64 469 185 1307 109 516 1422 1522 1201 1338 335 1522 298 1116 505 32 1461 472 329 976 478 902 998