damnation.creative

The case was ruled 5-4 in favor of Mr. Johnson. Chief Justice Rehnquist, Justice White, and Justice O'Connor displayed their firm belief in the minority ruling with a conjoined dissent, while Justice Stevens expressed his feelings in a separate dissent. Rehnquist wrote, "flag burning is the equivalent of an inarticulate grunt or roar that, it seems fair to say, is most likely to be indulged in not to express any particular idea, but to antagonize others. . . ." (SOURCE) He, and the others, go on to express their feelings on past wars fought in the name of, and to protect, the American Flag from desecrations such as the one committed by Mr. Johnson. They also put emphasis on hundreds of thousands of lives lost. They also touched on parts of the revolutionary war and the fact that the flag is a national symbol. Justice Stevens argued, "Even if flag burning could be considered just another species of symbolic speech under the logical application of the rules that the Court has developed in its interpretation of the First Amendment in other contexts, this case has an intangible dimension that makes those rules inapplicable."(SOURCE) His belief is that the court has been interpreting the ideas put into the constitution incorrectly the whole time and that this case should put an end to that. In the end, all four justices stood united in their belief that the flag should not be burned or desecrated in any way and that Mr. Johnson should be held to the ruling of the lesser court.