In the case,Texas v.Johnson,the texas court tried and convicted Mr.Johnson for violating the statute that prohibited the desecration of venerated objects e.g the American flag that could arouse anger in other individuals.Johnson appealed with the argument that the actions were a "symbolic speech" protected by the First Amendment.
Texas laws punishes actions such as flag burning that might arouse anger in other but it this case the outrage alone couldnot justify for supressing Johnson's freedom of speech.In this perspective,the Texas law discriminated upon view point in that though it punishes such actions,it still specifically exempt prosecution of actions with similar defination such as burning or burying of worn-out flag.
Therefore, flag burning in Texas v.Johnson constituted a symbolic speech and is protected by the Firts Amendment.
Answer:
to unite people to form alliances and to expand territory
Explanation:
Answer: b
Explanation:
i learned this like last quarter
Serves as a leader: what he says, people will follow. Hence why it’s ludicrous for him to suggest ingesting disinfectant.
Commander in chief: Leads the strategy in military
Appoint ambassadors and chairs of cabinets and departments
Influences policy making by using veto power.
Can initiate trade.
Etc.
Answer:
i think because they were not good even i think dont know for sure
Explanation:
