- cross-posted to:
- lefty_news@ibbit.at
- cross-posted to:
- lefty_news@ibbit.at
cross-posted from: https://ibbit.at/post/78177
President Donald Trump bragged that his administration “took the freedom of speech away” from protesters who burn the American flag during a rant against anti-fascists on Wednesday. While speaking about “antifa-inspired terror” in a meeting on the anti-fascist movement, Trump touted his recent executive order instructing Attorney General Pam Bondi to find ways to prosecute people who burn the…
From Truthout via this RSS feed
No. You cannot.
The act explicitly was done in protest. As an act of first amendment protected speech, as flag burning was explicitly determined to be by the supreme court.
The application of these laws is purely political. Used solely because the object burned was the flag. Intent is always included in prosecuting criminal acts. It is often the determining factor in whether laws even apply.
Burning a flag a California forest is a false equivalency. And for the most part, yes, you could go out into the forest and burn a flag. It would be stupid and you would be liable for any damages you caused if it started a wildfire. You wouldn’t be prosecuted just for burning the flag.
The entire premise on first amendment speech applying here is super important, because if you can make it criminal to do something related, like starting a fire at all, you have, in effect, made that act of free speech illegal. This is crucial. Fundamental.
Alrighty, I’m going to go burn a flag in the movie theater in protest tomorrow. Surely the judge will throw out the charge.
If you don’t do any harm. All the theater goers know your about to light it and can leave if they don’t want to be there and it’s done as a form of protest.
Why do you keep using an example where its potentially significantly dangerous?
You can keep doing what-about-isms all day. This was a clear first amendment protected act and the charges are being used to punish political speech.