So this election got me to thinking about flags and draft cards and swastikas and other symbols displayed in the USofA; and how we react to seeing them.
In 1966, David O'Brien burned his selective service registration certificate on the steps of the South Boston courthouse. He told the FBI that he burned it because of his antiwar beliefs and to encourage others to burn their certificates in protest.
Well, nobody in federal court was buying that, and Mr. O'Brien was convicted. He claimed that the conviction was in violation of his freedom of speech, because the First Amendment protects all forms of "communication of ideas by conduct."
Chief Justice Earl Warren disagreed. He felt that Mr. O'Brien's actions were just that - acts, and not speech. So, the law under which Mr. O'Brien was convicted, and therefore the conviction itself, were upheld.
In 1984, Gregory Lee Johnson demonstrated in Dallas, Texas to protest certain administsration policies and certain Dallas-based corporations. At some point during the activities, someone handed Mr. Johnson an American flag. He doused it with kerosene and set it ablaze. There were no physical injuries or threat of injuries. He was charged and convicted of "desecration of a venerated object," a misdemeanor.
Was this protected conduct? Justice William Brennan reflected, "if there is a bedrock principle underlying the First Amendment, it is that the government may not prohibit the expression of an idea simply because society finds the idea itself offensive or disagreeable."
At issue in 1978 was a "Racial Slur" ordinance out of Skokie, Illinois which prohibited the dissemination of any material promoting and inciting racial or religious hatred. Part of the definition of "material" was a "public display of markings and clothing of symbolic significance." So this definition would presumably incompass uniforms worn by a nazi organization which planned a little "peaceful" demonstration in front of the Skokie Village Hall. Many holocaust survivors, as well as other Jewish residents lived in Skokie at the time.
Was that ordinance in violation of the First Amendment's protections of freedom of expression, no matter how abhorent that expression may be to some listeners?
