Texas v. Johnson was a 1989 Supreme Court case about whether burning the American flag during a political protest could be punished as a crime. The case matters because it tested the meaning of the First Amendment when speech is deeply unpopular or offensive to many people.
The Court had to decide whether the government could protect a national symbol by limiting expressive conduct. Its decision became one of the most important rulings on symbolic speech in United States history.
Gregory Lee Johnson burned a flag outside the 1984 Republican National Convention in Dallas to protest government policies. Texas convicted him under a state law that banned desecration of a venerated object, but Johnson argued that his act was political expression. In a 5 to 4 decision, the Supreme Court ruled that flag burning in this context was protected symbolic speech.
The ruling showed that the First Amendment often protects expression because of its message, even when that message causes anger or controversy.
Key Facts
- Case name: Texas v. Johnson
- Year decided: 1989
- Vote: 5 to 4 in favor of Johnson
- Constitutional issue: Does the First Amendment protect flag burning as symbolic speech?
- Holding: The government may not punish expression simply because society finds the idea offensive or disagreeable.
- Key principle: Political expression receives strong First Amendment protection, including some nonverbal actions.
Vocabulary
- Symbolic speech
- Symbolic speech is nonverbal conduct meant to communicate a political, social, or personal message.
- First Amendment
- The First Amendment protects freedoms such as speech, press, religion, assembly, and petition.
- Majority opinion
- A majority opinion explains the legal reasoning of the justices who agree on the Court's decision.
- Dissenting opinion
- A dissenting opinion explains why some justices disagree with the Court's decision.
- Content-based restriction
- A content-based restriction is a law that limits expression because of the message or idea being communicated.
Common Mistakes to Avoid
- Saying the case made all flag burning legal everywhere is wrong because the ruling protected political expression, not dangerous conduct such as arson, threats, or property destruction.
- Saying the Court approved of flag burning is wrong because the Court protected the right to express a message, not the popularity or morality of that message.
- Forgetting the close vote is a mistake because the 5 to 4 decision shows that the constitutional issue was highly contested.
- Treating symbolic speech as only spoken words is wrong because the First Amendment can protect actions when they are intended to communicate a clear message.
Practice Questions
- 1 Texas v. Johnson was decided in 1989 and involved events from 1984. How many years passed between the protest and the Supreme Court decision?
- 2 The Supreme Court vote was 5 to 4. What fraction of the justices were in the majority, and what percentage is that to the nearest tenth?
- 3 Explain why the Court treated flag burning in this case as speech even though no spoken words were required.