LegalReader.com  ·  Legal News, Analysis, & Commentary

News & Politics

“Flag-Burning Teen Indicted For Arson”


— August 21, 2003

When I first read that headline, I thought “here’s another stupid collateral attack on the first amendment.” Then I read the story. The flag the teen burned belonged to someone else. It was hanging on the side of a building when he burned it. And the burning damaged the building. That’s arson. It would have been arson if he burned an advertising banner instead of a flag, and the first amendment doesn’t come into play. Details here. (via How Appealing)


When I first read that headline, I thought “here’s another stupid collateral attack on the first amendment.” Then I read the story. The flag the teen burned belonged to someone else. It was hanging on the side of a building when he burned it. And the burning damaged the building. That’s arson. It would have been arson if he burned an advertising banner instead of a flag, and the first amendment doesn’t come into play. Details here. (via How Appealing)

Join the conversation!