color of law
Accomplished Advocate
Is the police symbolic depiction of the American Flag incorporating a thin blue line a violation of law?
Over the years I would hear people say that the depiction of the American Flag incorporating a thin blue line denigrates the American flag and is unlawful. But is it?
In Pleasant Grove City, Utah v. Summum, 555 U.S. 460 (2009) the Supreme Court said:
“If [the government] were engaging in [its] own expressive conduct, then the Free Speech Clause has no application. The Free Speech Clause restricts government regulation of private speech; it does not regulate government speech…A government entity has the right to “speak for itself.”
Then in United States v. Eichman, 496 U.S. 310 (1990) the Supreme Court quoted Texas v. Johnson, 491 U.S. 397 (1989) another Supreme Court case by saying:
“If there is a bedrock principle underlying the First Amendment, it is that the government may not prohibit the expression of an idea simply because society finds the idea itself offensive or disagreeable.”
Additionally, the Eichman court also cited Spence v. Washington, 418 U. S. 405, 418 U. S. 414 (1974) which said: (State's interest in protecting flag's symbolic value is directly related to suppression of expression and thus O'Brien test is inapplicable even where statute declared "simply . . . that nothing may be affixed to or superimposed on a United States flag").
So basically, if a government entity allows that symbol to be used to express a government’s symbolic message, that message is protected speech, but not in a First Amendment sort of way. Governments don’t have rights; they only have force.
Over the years I would hear people say that the depiction of the American Flag incorporating a thin blue line denigrates the American flag and is unlawful. But is it?
In Pleasant Grove City, Utah v. Summum, 555 U.S. 460 (2009) the Supreme Court said:
“If [the government] were engaging in [its] own expressive conduct, then the Free Speech Clause has no application. The Free Speech Clause restricts government regulation of private speech; it does not regulate government speech…A government entity has the right to “speak for itself.”
Then in United States v. Eichman, 496 U.S. 310 (1990) the Supreme Court quoted Texas v. Johnson, 491 U.S. 397 (1989) another Supreme Court case by saying:
“If there is a bedrock principle underlying the First Amendment, it is that the government may not prohibit the expression of an idea simply because society finds the idea itself offensive or disagreeable.”
Additionally, the Eichman court also cited Spence v. Washington, 418 U. S. 405, 418 U. S. 414 (1974) which said: (State's interest in protecting flag's symbolic value is directly related to suppression of expression and thus O'Brien test is inapplicable even where statute declared "simply . . . that nothing may be affixed to or superimposed on a United States flag").
So basically, if a government entity allows that symbol to be used to express a government’s symbolic message, that message is protected speech, but not in a First Amendment sort of way. Governments don’t have rights; they only have force.
