|
|
Shawn Eichman was convicted of knowingly setting fire to several United States flags on the steps of the U.S. Capitol while protesting various aspects of the government’s domestic and foreign policy. Mark Haggerty and others were also convicted for violating the Act by knowingly setting fire to a United States flag in Seattle while protesting the passage of the Flag Protection Act of 1989. Federal district courts in Washington, D.C. (731 F. Supp. 1123 (1990)) and in the Western District of Washington State (731 F. Supp. 415 (1990)) held the Act unconstitutional and dismissed the charges against the various defendants. In the Supreme Court the two cases were consolidated. Solicitor General Kenneth Starr argued the cause for the United States. William M. Kunstler, who had represented the flag-burners in Texas v. Johnson, argued the cause for Eichman and Haggerty. Less than a month after the case was argued, the Supreme Court affirmed the lower court judgments and ruled parts of the Flag Protection Act of 1989 unconstitutional under the First Amendment. Held: “Although the Flag Protection Act contains no explicit content-based limitation on the scope of prohibited conduct, it is nevertheless clear that the Government's asserted interest is "related `to the suppression of free expression,'" [cite] and concerned with the content of such expression. The Government's interest in protecting the "physical integrity" of a privately owned flag rests upon a perceived need to preserve the flag's status as a symbol of our Nation and certain national ideals. But the mere destruction or disfigurement of a particular physical manifestation of the symbol, without more, does not diminish or otherwise affect the symbol itself in any way." |