Posted on May 3, 2015
Why don't we follow US Code Title 18 regarding desecration of the US Flag?
5.28K
9
5
4
4
0
§700. Desecration of the flag of the United States; penalties
(a)(1) Whoever knowingly mutilates, defaces, physically defiles, burns, maintains on the floor or ground, or tramples upon any flag of the United States shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for not more than one year, or both.
(2) This subsection does not prohibit any conduct consisting of the disposal of a flag when it has become worn or soiled.
(b) As used in this section, the term “flag of the United States” means any flag of the United States, or any part thereof, made of any substance, of any size, in a form that is commonly displayed.
(c) Nothing in this section shall be construed as indicating an intent on the part of Congress to deprive any State, territory, possession, or the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico of jurisdiction over any offense over which it would have jurisdiction in the absence of this section.
(d)(1) An appeal may be taken directly to the Supreme Court of the United States from any interlocutory or final judgment, decree, or order issued by a United States district court ruling upon the constitutionality of subsection (a).
(2) The Supreme Court shall, if it has not previously ruled on the question, accept jurisdiction over the appeal and advance on the docket and expedite to the greatest extent possible.
(Added Pub. L. 90–381, §1, July 5, 1968, 82 Stat. 291; amended Pub. L. 101–131, §§2, 3, Oct. 28, 1989, 103 Stat. 777.)
Amendments
1989—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 101–131, §2(a), amended subsec. (a) generally. Prior to amendment, subsec. (a) read as follows: “Whoever knowingly casts contempt upon any flag of the United States by publicly mutilating, defacing, defiling, burning, or trampling upon it shall be fined not more than $1,000 or imprisoned for not more than one year, or both.”
Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 101–131, §2(b), amended subsec. (b) generally. Prior to amendment, subsec. (b) read as follows: “The term ‘flag of the United States’ as used in this section, shall include any flag, standard colors, ensign, or any picture or representation of either, or of any part or parts of either, made of any substance or represented on any substance, of any size evidently purporting to be either of said flag, standard, color, or ensign of the United States of America, or a picture or a representation of either, upon which shall be shown the colors, the stars and the stripes, in any number of either thereof, or of any part or parts of either, by which the average person seeing the same without deliberation may believe the same to represent the flag, standards, colors, or ensign of the United States of America.”
Subsec. (d). Pub. L. 101–131, §3, added subsec. (d).
Short Title of 2000 Amendment
Pub. L. 106–547, §1, Dec. 19, 2000, 114 Stat. 2738, provided that: “This Act [enacting sections 716 and 1036 of this title] may be cited as the ‘Enhanced Federal Security Act of 2000’.”
Short Title of 1989 Amendment
Section 1 of Pub. L. 101–131 provided that: “This Act [amending this section] may be cited as the ‘Flag Protection Act of 1989’.”
(a)(1) Whoever knowingly mutilates, defaces, physically defiles, burns, maintains on the floor or ground, or tramples upon any flag of the United States shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for not more than one year, or both.
(2) This subsection does not prohibit any conduct consisting of the disposal of a flag when it has become worn or soiled.
(b) As used in this section, the term “flag of the United States” means any flag of the United States, or any part thereof, made of any substance, of any size, in a form that is commonly displayed.
(c) Nothing in this section shall be construed as indicating an intent on the part of Congress to deprive any State, territory, possession, or the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico of jurisdiction over any offense over which it would have jurisdiction in the absence of this section.
(d)(1) An appeal may be taken directly to the Supreme Court of the United States from any interlocutory or final judgment, decree, or order issued by a United States district court ruling upon the constitutionality of subsection (a).
(2) The Supreme Court shall, if it has not previously ruled on the question, accept jurisdiction over the appeal and advance on the docket and expedite to the greatest extent possible.
(Added Pub. L. 90–381, §1, July 5, 1968, 82 Stat. 291; amended Pub. L. 101–131, §§2, 3, Oct. 28, 1989, 103 Stat. 777.)
Amendments
1989—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 101–131, §2(a), amended subsec. (a) generally. Prior to amendment, subsec. (a) read as follows: “Whoever knowingly casts contempt upon any flag of the United States by publicly mutilating, defacing, defiling, burning, or trampling upon it shall be fined not more than $1,000 or imprisoned for not more than one year, or both.”
Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 101–131, §2(b), amended subsec. (b) generally. Prior to amendment, subsec. (b) read as follows: “The term ‘flag of the United States’ as used in this section, shall include any flag, standard colors, ensign, or any picture or representation of either, or of any part or parts of either, made of any substance or represented on any substance, of any size evidently purporting to be either of said flag, standard, color, or ensign of the United States of America, or a picture or a representation of either, upon which shall be shown the colors, the stars and the stripes, in any number of either thereof, or of any part or parts of either, by which the average person seeing the same without deliberation may believe the same to represent the flag, standards, colors, or ensign of the United States of America.”
Subsec. (d). Pub. L. 101–131, §3, added subsec. (d).
Short Title of 2000 Amendment
Pub. L. 106–547, §1, Dec. 19, 2000, 114 Stat. 2738, provided that: “This Act [enacting sections 716 and 1036 of this title] may be cited as the ‘Enhanced Federal Security Act of 2000’.”
Short Title of 1989 Amendment
Section 1 of Pub. L. 101–131 provided that: “This Act [amending this section] may be cited as the ‘Flag Protection Act of 1989’.”
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 3
1
1
0
Best reason I could find ...
U.S. Supreme Court - UNITED STATES v. EICHMAN, 496 U.S. 310 (1990)
We are aware that desecration of the flag is deeply offensive to many. But the same might be said, for example, of virulent ethnic and religious epithets, see Terminiello v. Chicago, 337 U.S. 1 (1949), vulgar repudiations of the draft, see [496 U.S. 310, 319] Cohen v. California, 403 U.S. 15 (1971), and scurrilous caricatures, see Hustler Magazine, Inc. v. Falwell, 485 U.S. 46 (1988). "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." Johnson, supra, at 414. Punishing desecration of the flag dilutes the very freedom that makes this emblem so revered, and worth revering. The judgments of the District Courts are Affirmed.
As I have said - If you violate the Constitution when protecting a symbol of that Constitution then "they" win
U.S. Supreme Court - UNITED STATES v. EICHMAN, 496 U.S. 310 (1990)
We are aware that desecration of the flag is deeply offensive to many. But the same might be said, for example, of virulent ethnic and religious epithets, see Terminiello v. Chicago, 337 U.S. 1 (1949), vulgar repudiations of the draft, see [496 U.S. 310, 319] Cohen v. California, 403 U.S. 15 (1971), and scurrilous caricatures, see Hustler Magazine, Inc. v. Falwell, 485 U.S. 46 (1988). "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." Johnson, supra, at 414. Punishing desecration of the flag dilutes the very freedom that makes this emblem so revered, and worth revering. The judgments of the District Courts are Affirmed.
As I have said - If you violate the Constitution when protecting a symbol of that Constitution then "they" win
(1)
(0)
SPC Jan Allbright, M.Sc., R.S.
Col (Join to see)
Well the USC is the Law of the Land. Some parts have been held in abeyance .. I guess because at some point in the future EICHMAN could be overturned.
Well the USC is the Law of the Land. Some parts have been held in abeyance .. I guess because at some point in the future EICHMAN could be overturned.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
Because the majority (those that our representatives in Congress represent) of our society doesn't care enough about our flag or what it represents...but rather their own personal interests. (Going viral)
Our society (family/education system) doesn't teach our younger generation about our flag or why we should hold it in high regard. Our schools may go through the motion and recite the pledge at some schools...but that may just be going through a motion and not explaining WHY we 'pledge our allegiance'.
Our society (family/education system) doesn't teach our younger generation about our flag or why we should hold it in high regard. Our schools may go through the motion and recite the pledge at some schools...but that may just be going through a motion and not explaining WHY we 'pledge our allegiance'.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
'Because that infringes on "Freedom of Speech" apparently.'
I think these jackholes who are doing this Internet Challenge should be penalized to the max. But, I have liked watching the videos of the Veterans standing up against this idiocy.
I think these jackholes who are doing this Internet Challenge should be penalized to the max. But, I have liked watching the videos of the Veterans standing up against this idiocy.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google