236 ❯ STEP 5. Build Your Test-Taking Confidence
61234case of Texas v. Johnson). The justices of the Supreme Court ruled that the burning
of the flag caused neither “breaches of the peace” nor “a serious disturbance” (Source
D). Furthermore, United States v. Eichman voices the same opinion, thus, effectively
eliminating the Flag Protection Act of 1989 (Source D). And, finally, to sooth the
naysayers voicing opinions of a free-for-all burn, a 2006 Los Angeles Times editorial
reports that “no epidemic of flag-burning” has occurred since such rulings. Indeed, flag-
burning, as a freedom, fulfills all legal qualifications as an act of peaceful expression. No
harm, no foul.
Ultimately, the voice of the people clearly decrees that an amendment to rid flag-
burning is superfluous. The Supreme Court has already sanctioned flag-burning as a
right in the penumbra of the First Amendment, and that Amendment, throughout its
decade of existence, hasn’t achieved the needed majority of Congress (Source G). But the
sovereign of this state, the people, says it all. The 2006 poll in U S A To d a y shows a minor,
but significant 54 percent majority of the American public believing an amendment
against flag-burning is unnecessary (Source C). Mr. Lindberg really did say it best in
his own editorial: “. . . most Americans will think you are an ingrate jerk . . . But even
if a constitutional amendment passes, no one is proposing the death penalty for flag-
burning.” Flag-burning is unpatriotic at best, but Americans have enough common sense
not to use flag-burning as a favorite pastime without a law on their backs.Student B
Over the course of American history, political freedoms and inalienable rights have
been the ultimate treasure of the American people. As a nation, we pride ourselves on our
right to express our opinions without threat of punishment. From the Supreme Court
ruling against the Alien and Sedition Acts to the current flag burning issue, free speech
has been upheld.
In the cases of Texas v. Johnson and the U.S. v. Eichman, the Supreme Court has said
that the act of desecrating the American flag is not illegal (Source D). This reliable source
states that flag burning does not directly threaten anyone; in fact, a reference to the flag
is amorphous. The flag is a symbol that takes billions of forms across the entire country.
As stated in Source I, “There is no ‘the’ flag . . . it is an idea of the flag and therefore
beyond the reach of the flames.” An anti-flag burning amendment would be nebulous
and would be incapable of addressing a specific act of flag desecration.
A survey taken by U S A To d a y indicated that more than half of those Americans
tallied do not want such an amendment added (Source C). The Constitution is a
document for the people, by the people, and of the people; therefore, if an opinion is to
matter, it should be the viewpoint of the people. They are the ones who need to abide by
the laws and should have some say in their construction.
However, when Congress voted a series of six times, every single time there were
more representatives for the amendment than were against it (Source G). There is a
serious discrepancy between the people and their representatives. The author of Source F