Which of the following correctly explains how the Supreme Court’s decisions in Texas v. Johnson and United States v. Eichman contributed to the right of freedom of speech?
Both Texas v. Johnson and United States v. Eichman contributed to the right of freedom of speech by reinforcing the protection of symbolic speech under the First Amendment.
In Texas v. Johnson (1989), the Supreme Court ruled that flag burning is a form of symbolic speech protected by the First Amendment. The case involved Gregory Lee Johnson, who burned an American flag during a protest at the 1984 Republican National Convention in Dallas. Johnson was convicted under a Texas law that prohibited flag desecration. The Supreme Court reversed the conviction, stating that flag burning is an expressive act and a legitimate form of protest. This decision affirmed the principle that even unpopular or controversial forms of speech are protected under the First Amendment.
Similarly, in United States v. Eichman (1990), the Supreme Court invalidated the Flag Protection Act of 1989, which criminalized the desecration of the American flag. The case involved Shawn Eichman, who was prosecuted for burning a stolen American flag during a protest against President George H.W. Bush. The Supreme Court held that the act of flag burning, including desecration, is a form of protected speech under the First Amendment. This decision reinforced the principle established in Texas v. Johnson, further solidifying the right to engage in symbolic speech, including flag burning.
Together, these two cases expanded the scope of protected speech by establishing that the expressiveness of symbolic acts, such as flag burning, is a form of protected speech under the First Amendment. They upheld the right to engage in controversial and dissenting forms of expression, contributing to the broader understanding and preservation of freedom of speech in the United States.