This question seems to be incomplete. However, there´s enough information to find the right answer.
I understand that this flag has serious important meanings . . . But that does not mean that . . . people may not under the First Amendment show their feelings by what Texas calls desecration of a venerated object. I think it's a most important case. I sense that it goes to the heart of the First Amendment, to hear things or to see things that we hate test the First Amendment more than seeing or hearing things that we like. It wasn't designed for things we like. They never needed a First Amendment.
—William M. Kunstler, Attorney for Gregory Lee Johnson, Texas v. Johnson
Use the drop-down menu to complete the sentence.
In this excerpt, attorney William Kunstler is arguing against his client's conviction.
The main idea of this excerpt is that the First Amendment is essential because it
Answer: allows for symbolic speech
Explanation:
After Gregory Lee Johnson, William Kunstler´s client, was tried and convicted for having burned an American flag to protest against Reagan´s government, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals reversed the conviction and the case was sent to the Supreme Court. The Texas v. Johnson court case brought up the question of whether or not the desecration of an American flag is a form of speech protected under the First Amendment. The court ruled that Johnson burning the flag was a form of expression with a distinctively political nature and was protected by the First Amendment.
The answer is Macchu Pichu
US did not know the geography and could not prepare for surprise attacks.
The Viet Cong and North Vietnamese troops used surprise attacks and systems of tunnels to supply the war. Peasants would also engaged in war as US soldiers were walking from place to place. Not knowing the enemy, the US increased troop numbers to combat the surprise attacks.
<span />
Answer:
C
Explanation:
Explain the Reapportionment Act of 1929. Census is taken every 10 years and states are given more House seats based on the increase of population. It created the permanent size of House 435 seats. Congress is determined the number of seats each state would have after each census.
In Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union, 521 U.S.844 (1997), the Supreme Court held in a unanimous decision that provisions of the 1996 Communications Decency Act (CDA) were an unconstitutional, content-based restriction of First Amendment free speech rights.
<h3>What is
Communications Decency Act?</h3>
The Communications Decency Act of 1996 was the first noteworthy attempt by the United States Congress to material on the Internet. The United States Supreme Court unanimously threw down the act's anti-indecency sections in the landmark case Reno v. ACLU in 1997.
The CDA made it illegal for anybody to knowingly send "obscene or indecent" messages to anyone under the age of 18. It also prohibited the "knowing" display of "patently objectionable" materials in a manner "accessible" to minors under the age of 18.
The Communications Decency Act of 1996 (47 USC 223) was a contentious law that prohibited anybody utilizing interstate or communications from distributing obscene or immoral information if they knew the receiver was under the age of 18—regardless of who initiated the communications.
To know more about Communications Decency Act follow the link:
brainly.com/question/27250793
#SPJ4
