(C) Daily Kos
This story was originally published by Daily Kos and is unaltered.
. . . . . . . . . .



Do you agree with the executive order aimed at flag burning? [1]

['This Content Is Not Subject To Review Daily Kos Staff Prior To Publication.']

Date: 2025-09-02

Donald Trump's executive order regarding flag burning is a highly debated and politically charged directive. While many saw it as a strong stance on patriotism, the order did not create a new law or an outright ban on flag burning, as this would violate the First Amendment. Instead, the order focused on using existing laws to increase prosecutions for actions that might accompany flag burning, such as inciting a riot or violence.

The reasons given for the order centered on protecting the American flag as a sacred symbol of freedom and national identity. Supporters argued that burning the flag is a disrespectful and offensive act that should not be tolerated. They also suggested that such acts could lead to violence and public disturbances, providing a legal justification for prosecution. On the other hand, opponents and legal experts, including the American Civil Liberties Union, argued that the executive order was a political stunt. They asserted that it was a clear attempt to bypass established constitutional protections and that it would not hold up in court. Critics also pointed out that the order's language was vague and could be used to suppress political dissent. To me, this is clearly his intent.

The Supreme Court's view on flag burning is unambiguous. In Texas v. Johnson (1989) and United States v. Eichman (1990), the Court ruled that flag burning is a form of symbolic speech protected by the First Amendment. The majority opinion, written by Justice William Brennan, stated that the government cannot prohibit the expression of an idea simply because society finds it offensive or disagreeable. This landmark decision affirmed that even unpopular and controversial forms of expression are crucial to a free and open society. The Court held that the government's interest in preserving the flag as a symbol does not outweigh an individual's right to freedom of speech.

The nuance of this executive order lies in its careful, but ultimately impotent, legal maneuvering. It does not directly ban flag burning because it can't, the Supreme Court has already ruled on this issue. Instead, the order attempts to create a loophole by directing federal agencies to "enforce all applicable federal laws" against individuals who burn the flag in conjunction with other illegal acts. For example, a person who burns a flag on a public sidewalk could be prosecuted not for desecrating the flag, but for violating a municipal fire code or for disorderly conduct. The order instructs federal prosecutors to seek the maximum penalties for these accompanying crimes, effectively using them as a vehicle to punish the act of flag burning without directly criminalizing it. This is what the order focuses on. It’s a loophole in a sense. The order essentially reaffirms existing laws rather than establishing new ones. It’s a political document designed to appear tough on flag burning without actually changing the legal landscape, and a way to signal to a political base while sidestepping a direct constitutional challenge. What’s your opinion though? Do you agree with the executive order aimed at flag burning?

Check out the full discussion and subscribe to podcast.

Additional:

Is Flag Burning Still Legal Under Trump's New Executive Order?

Prosecuting Burning of The American Flag – The White House

[END]
---
[1] Url: https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2025/9/2/2341414/-Do-you-agree-with-the-executive-order-aimed-at-flag-burning?pm_campaign=front_page&pm_source=more_community&pm_medium=web

Published and (C) by Daily Kos
Content appears here under this condition or license: Site content may be used for any purpose without permission unless otherwise specified.

via Magical.Fish Gopher News Feeds:
gopher://magical.fish/1/feeds/news/dailykos/