Question

2.7 Ethics Case

Congress enacted the Flag Protection Act, which made it a crime to knowingly mutilate, deface, physically defile, burn, or trample the U.S. flag. The law provided for fines and up to one year in prison upon conviction [18 U.S.C. Section 700]. Certain individuals set fire to several U.S. flags on the steps of the U.S. Capitol in Washington, DC, to protest various aspects of the federal government’s foreign and domestic policy. In a separate incident, other individuals set fire to a U.S. flag to protest the act’s passage. All these individuals were prosecuted for violating the act. The U.S. district courts held the act unconstitutional, in violation of the defendants’ First Amendment free speech rights, and dismissed the charges. The government appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, which consolidated the two cases.

Who wins?

Does a flag burner exhibit moral behavior?

United States v. Eichman, 496 U.S. 310, 110 S.Ct. 2404, 110 L.Ed.2d 287, Web 1990 U.S. Lexis 3087 (Supreme Court of the United States).

Answer 1

In the first instance the case was dismissed because the charge was just flag desecration in such case and this actually contradicts the freedom of expression right under the constitution of the country. In the second instance the defendants were charged for destruction of government property because the flag that is burnt was stolen from the Seattle's Capitol Hill post office.

I believe that a person or an individual who is burning a flag actually violates moral behavior because the flag of the nation is the emblem and it is through the flag that the country is representated in all fields hence I believe that it should be respected and protected at any cost and if there is any way the individuals wants to go against the government then they should resort to other ways of protest but should restrict themselves from burning the national logo and emblem which the residents should be proud of.