Texas+v.+Johnson

great cartoon!
 * Texas v. Johnson**

**__D ate of Hearing: __**

March 21, 1989

"Texas v. Johnson." //LII | LII / Legal Information Institute//. 21 Mar. 1989. Web. 23 Jan. 2012. l>.

** __ Chief of Justice: __ **

William Rehnquist

__** Biography: **__

Chief of Justice of the United States Supreme Court. Born Oct. 1, 1924. He attended Kenyon College in Ohio for a short period of time before serving in WWII. After the war, Rehnquist achieved the bachelor and master’s degree in political science from Stanford University. Later on he went on to receive his master’s in government from Harvard University and his law degree from Stanford Law School. From 1952 to 1953, Rehnquist worked as a law clerk for Justice Robert H. Jackson. 1953 to 1969, Rehnquist was in private practice in Phoenix, Arizona and joined the Republican Party. He returned to Washington in 1968. Rehnquist served as the Assistant Attorney General of the Office of Legal Counsel from 1969 to 1971. **(what did he do from 1971 to 1986?)** When Chief Justice Warren Burger retired in 1986, President Ronald Reagan nominated Rehnquist to fill the position. His associate justice seat was filled byAntonin Scalia. After 1989, when a ‘new right’ majority had been established by President Reagan, Rehnquist framed a series of conservative rulings on abortion, affirmative action, and capital punishment. During his time as Chief Justice, Rehnquist presided over the impeachment trial of Bill Clinton and the Bush v. Gore election decision. October 26, 2004, Rehnquist was diagnosed with thyroid cancer. He died on September 3, 2005, and was replaced by John Roberts on September 29, 2005.

"William Rehnquist Biography - Facts, Birthday, Life Story - Biography.com." //Famous// //Biographies & TV Shows// - //Biography.com//. Web. 24 Jan. 2012. <[].>

"Texas vs Johnson." UMKC School of Law. Web. 24 Jan. 2012. <[].>

**__<span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #0000ff; font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 20px; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Documents or amendments to the Constitution relevant to the case: __** <span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">The First Amendment- Freedom of of Speech, Press, Religion, and Petition. This is relevant because Johnson was using his right of expression .when he was burning the flag but since the first amendment does not specifically say freedom of expression,the Supreme Court was not technically disregarding the First Amendment. **__ Summary of the Case/ Analysis: __** <span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #000000; font-family: Arial; font-size: 14px; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Gregory Lee Johnson was protesting against Reagan’s administration policies in front of Dallas City Hall and burned an American Flag. He was convicted under a Texas law that is against flag desecration and sentenced to 1 year in jail and a $2000 dollar fine. The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals reversed the conviction and it was sent to the Supreme Court. There, they finalized that it was against the rights given to people by the First Amendment and that he couldn’t be convicted.
 * <span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #00ff00; font-family: Arial; font-size: 18px; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Summary: **

<span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #000000; font-family: Arial; font-size: 14px; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">I believe that sending him to jail for the desecration of the American flag was against the First Amendment, but at the same time burning a national symbol can cause revolts and problems on a large scale.
 * <span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #00ff00; font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 18px; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Analysis: **

<span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">"Texas v. Johnson | The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law." The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law | AMultimedia Archive of the Supreme Court of the United States. Web. 12 Feb. 2012. <http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1988/1988_88_155>.


 * __<span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #0000ff; font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 20px; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Main Issue/ argument: __**


 * Main Issue: **

<span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">In 1984, in front of the Dallas City Hall, Gregory Lee Johnson burned an American flag as a means of protest against Reagan administration policies. Johnson was tried and convicted under a Texas law outlawing flag desecration. He was sentenced to one year in jail and assessed a $2,000 fine. After the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals reversed the conviction, the case went to the Supreme Court.


 * Argument: **

<span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Is the desecration of an American flag, by burning or otherwise, a form of speech that is protected under the First Amendment?

**<span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #0000ff; font-family: Arial; font-size: 20px; vertical-align: baseline;">__Who Voted What, Dissenting, and Why?__ **

<span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">The Pro voted that it violated the First Amendment and burning the flag was just Johnsons’ way of getting his point across through freedom of speech. The Con voted that it violated the Texas statute and it can trigger a rebellion. <span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Pro: Not guilty (violates the First Amendment) || * <span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-family: arial; font-size: 15px; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Rehnquist, W. Con (Wrote dissenting) <span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Con: Is guilty || **Why did the judges vote against this case?**
 * * <span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-family: arial; font-size: 15px; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Brennan, W. Pro (Wrote majority opinion)
 * <span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-family: arial; font-size: 15px; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Marshall, T. Pro (Joined majority opinion)
 * <span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-family: arial; font-size: 15px; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Blackmun, H. Pro (Joined majority opinion)
 * <span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-family: arial; font-size: 15px; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Scalia, A. Pro (Joined majority opinion)
 * <span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-family: arial; font-size: 15px; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Kennedy, A. Pro (Joined majority opinion)
 * <span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-family: arial; font-size: 15px; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">White, B. Con (Joined dissenting)
 * <span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-family: arial; font-size: 15px; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">O'Connor, S.D. Con (Joined dissenting)
 * <span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-family: arial; font-size: 15px; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Stevens, J.P. Con (Joined dissenting )

<span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">"Texas v. Johnson - ACLU - ProCon.org."ACLU.ProCon.org - <span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Is the ACLU Good for America? Web. 12 Feb. 2012. <span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;"><http://aclu.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=537>.

__**<span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #0000ff; font-family: Arial; font-size: 20px; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">The Members of the Court at that time and Serving Time: **__

<span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">(Wrote the majority opinion) William J. Brennan Jr.- 33 years, 9 months, 4 days

<span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">(Voted with the majority) Thurgood Marshall- 23 years, 11 months, 29 days

<span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">(Voted with the majority) Harry A. Blackmun- 24 years, 1 month, 24 days

<span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">(Voted with the majority) Antonin Scalia- 25 years, 4 months, 2 days

<span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">(Wrote a regular concurrence) Anthony M. Kennedy- 23 years, 11 months, 10 days

<span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">(Wrote a dissent) William H. Rehnquist- 33 years, 7 months, 26 days

<span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">(Voted with the minority, joined Rehnquist's dissent) Byron R. White- 31 years, 2 days, 12 days

<span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">(Wrote a dissent) John Paul Stevens- 34 years, 6 months, 11 days

<span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">(Voted with the minority, joined Rehnquist's dissent) Sandra Day O’Connor- 24 years, 4 months, 6 days

<span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">"Texas v. Johnson | The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law." //The Oyez// <span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">//Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law | A Multimedia Archive of the// <span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">//Supreme Court of the United States//. Web. 27 Jan. 2012. <span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;"><http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1988/1988_88_155>.

<span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #0000ff; font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 20px; vertical-align: baseline;">**__Decision rendered and Vote:__** <span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-family: Arial; font-size: 16px; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Before the case went to the supreme court, Johnson was fined with 2000 and a year in prison. After it went to the Supreme Court, Johnson was found not-guilty of any crime in a vote of 5-4. "Texas v. Johnson | The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law." //The Oyez// //Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law | A Multimedia Archive of the Supreme Court of the// //United States//. Web. 09 Feb. 2012. <http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1988/1988_88_155>. __**<span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #0000ff; font-family: Arial; font-size: 20px; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Personal Opinion of the case: **__ <span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #000000; display: block; font-family: arial; font-size: 14px; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">** Piper: ** My opinion of the case was that Johnson was very wrong for burning the flag even though it was him expressing his communist ways. I don't think it was right to do this, but as much as it isn't right, it was not against the law. Therefore there was no reason to go to the supreme court. **<span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #0000ff; font-family: Arial; font-size: 20px; vertical-align: baseline;">__What If The Case Had Gone The Other Way?__ ** <span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #000000; display: block; font-family: arial; font-size: 14px; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">I believe that if the case had gone the other way, it would build more structure to our society and less people would be willing to do the wrong thing because they believe that they are entitled to their rights, more commonly the First Amendment. Whenever most criminals are sent to court, their first thought is that they are safe through freedom of speech (which includes more than the right to speak freely, but you also free when it comes to your thoughts and/or ideas) and can do what they please to make a point. If that case had gone through with Johnson being put in jail for the desecration of a national symbol, I think there might be fewer criminals when it comes to destruction of artifacts. At the same time, I feel that if Johnson had been sent to jail and it got around that he and others felt that it was against the First Amendment citizens would begin to riots and go against the government. Or the government could become stricter and there would be rules against anything that the government found harmful.
 * Daniel: ** I do truly believe that Johnson’s act was abiding by the 14th Amendment -- freedom of speech, assembly... -- but he was disturbing the public in my opinion. I think he should have gotten the fine for being a public nuisance, not for the riot.
 * Jabrielle: **I believe that the case told people that they could do the wrong thing and still get away with it; they believe they are entitled to their rights.

**Don't forget, suspected criminals don't have to say anything once they're arrested - that's part of the 5th Amendment right to not incriminate yourself. It's not a 1st Amendment right in this case.** __**BY:**__  ** Daniel Poberesky **   ** Jabrielle Johnson **   ** Piper Simmons **     ** 5.5/7 Bibliography -- should be alphabetized and put together in one section at the bottom. **  ** 24.5/28 - Content - more on why the judges ruled against this case. Also, there should be an excerpt or something from Brennan's majority ruling - why did they agree this action was a protected 1st Amendment right? **  ** 4.5 /5 - Organization - putting all of the notations at the bottom would be better. **  ** 34.5/40 Total **