US

Federal Judge Rules Missouri Law Against Flag Desecration Unconstitutional

Federal Judge Rules Missouri Law Against Flag Desecration Unconstitutional

AP

A federal judge in Missouri has ruled the state’s law against flag desecration is unconstitutional and cannot be enforced, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch reported.

U.S. District Judge Carol E. Jackson handed down the ruling Tuesday in the case of a man arrested in 2009 for cutting up an American flag with a knife then throwing it into the street:

Frank L. Snider, upset the Social Security Administration denied him disability benefits, attempted to set fire to a U.S. flag in his front yard on Oct. 20, 2009. Snider then shredded it with a knife and threw it in the street. A neighbor called police to complain, and a Cape Girardeau police officer arrived, issued Snider a summons for littering and left.

Snider was later charged with violating the state’s flag desecration law, arrested and held in jail for eight hours. The charge was later dropped after the prosecutor reviewed case law about a U.S. Supreme Court decision that held that a Texas state law criminalizing flag desecration was unconstitutional. A Cape Girardeau city ordinance prohibiting flag desecration was repealed in February 2011.

Missouri’s law states: “Any person who purposefully and publicly mutilates, defaces, defiles, tramples upon or otherwise desecrates the national flag of the United States or the state flag of the state of Missouri is guilty of the crime of flag desecration.”

According to the Post-Dispatch, Jackson’s ruling said the law is “unconstitutional on its face” and ordered state officials to stop “enforcing or threatening to enforce” it.

The American Civil Liberties Union of Eastern Missouri, which filed the lawsuit on Snider’s behalf, hailed the ruling as “a long-delayed victory in Missouri,” according to the Associated Press.

“It’s satisfying to have Missouri’s statute finally declared unconstitutional, but it’s not surprising at all,” ACLU attorney Tony Rothert said.

Missouri is one of approximately 20 states with laws banning flag desecration.

In a statement to Fox News, the state attorney general’s office said they were still reviewing the judges ruling and had not decided the next steps it will take.

“The sense of patriotism that runs through Missouri is strong,” Attorney General Chris Koster said. “Although we understood that defending the statute was an uphill battle, most Missourians have a strong reaction against flag desecration.  Our defense of the statute was our attempt to give voice to that patriotic sentiment.”

(h/t Fox News)

Comments (111)

1 2
  • rja444
    Posted on March 24, 2012 at 2:33pm

    The great thing about this country was to be able to disagree and protest with out fear of retribution. If someone buys a flaf and burns it, SO be it. If they take a flag from private or pulic property then there are laws already in place to deal with it. Lets get back to what used to set this country apart from the rest of the world. Our FREEDOM

    Report Post »  
    • A Doctors Labor Is Not My Right
      Posted on March 24, 2012 at 2:52pm

      (Repost)

      Bryan Spencer admits to rigging Missouri caucus! That’s both of them (Eugene Dokes is the other one)!

      See here.

      Bryan Spencer Speaks about Rigging St. Charles Caucus
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OuQIMfMVMYg

      And here.

      St. Charles County Caucus RIGGED As Admitted on Talk Radio By Dokes
      http://www.dailypaul.com/221947/st-charles-county-caucus-rigged-as-admitted-on-talk-radio-by-dokes

      Report Post »  
    • lukerw
      Posted on March 24, 2012 at 4:14pm

      You cannot Law RESPECT! You can Shun the DISRESPECTFUL!

      Report Post » lukerw  
    • vladdy
      Posted on March 24, 2012 at 9:06pm

      Aboutcaucus: I stumbled onto a Paul site shortly before the caucuses, and they were giving each other tips on how to take them over. I was kinda shocked they were so blatant about it.

      Report Post »  
    • sooner12
      Posted on March 24, 2012 at 9:57pm

      Missouri’s law states: “Any person who purposefully and publicly mutilates, defaces, defiles, tramples upon or otherwise desecrates the national flag of the United States or the state flag of the state of Missouri is guilty of the crime of flag desecration.”

      What about a person who purposefully mutilates, defaces, defiles, tramples upon or otherwise desecrates the person’s face who committed such a grevious act with a U.S. flag…….?

      Report Post »  
    • MCDAVE
      Posted on March 24, 2012 at 11:06pm

      My grandfather a proud veteran of WW2 witnessed first hand what happened to the French citizens who had co-operated with the Nazi’s,had this piece of Advise..”.Never turn your back against your own country”…These people who destroy are flag make me sick…

      Report Post »  
    • ConservativeCanucklehead
      Posted on March 25, 2012 at 2:33am

      Of course it’s unconstitutional. Burn the flag, pee on a painting of Lincoln (or Reagan or Obama). Do your worst. Freedom. Breathe it in. Breathe deeply.

      Report Post »  
  • Hmveteran
    Posted on March 24, 2012 at 2:22pm

    This judge made the right decision, our first ammendment right to free speech (also freedom of expression under the eyes of the law) is one of, if not our most, valued rights. By supressing one’s rights to express how they feel, we are undermining the entire concept of our country. People are allowed to disagree so long that they aren‘t supressing anyone else’s rights, and if that hurts your feelings then that’s just a shame. I don’t like that he ripped up the flag we fight to protect, but I think he has every right to do so.

    Report Post »  
  • I SPY
    Posted on March 24, 2012 at 2:03pm

    And just who exactly is US District Court judge Carol Jackson? Show us her picture. Let these communist “judges” be judged by the American people. The days of real judgement are near, and we all know it.

    Report Post » I SPY  
  • Finwek
    Posted on March 24, 2012 at 1:39pm

    This would be a completely different story if he had burned a Koran!! Funny how that works

    Report Post »  
  • screw
    Posted on March 24, 2012 at 12:55pm

    The flag in the AP image appears to be at half-mast…

    Report Post » screw  
    • ghostsouls
      Posted on March 24, 2012 at 2:19pm

      It’s at half mast to mourn the loss of our constitutional rights….

      Report Post » ghostsouls  
  • COFemale
    Posted on March 24, 2012 at 12:51pm

    Well of course, this fits into the Obama agenda. Anything that destroys or spits on America is open season and encouraged.

    Yes, we have not been perfect, but we put the past behind and move forward with changes for the better. When you spit on America, you spit on me. I don’t take kindly to being spit on.

    Report Post » COFemale  
    • Abraham Young
      Posted on March 24, 2012 at 2:36pm

      This is ludicrous. I just spit on the road, a part of America. Did you get splattered?

      The man has a right to do with his private property whatever he wishes. This is quintessentially American. The policeman who ticketed him for litter was correct. Littering is all you can charge the man with.

      Anyone who thinks the Missouri desecration law is constitutional, doesn’t understand the Constitution. How long will it be before you read it and understand it, before you lose it with well intentioned but misguided misconceptions?

      Report Post »  
  • marine249
    Posted on March 24, 2012 at 12:36pm

    I have a very simple way to look at this problem.
    If I were to burn the flag it would be wrong because
    I respect the flag’
    If one is a nut or lib, then it’s the same
    as if they were burning an old t-shirt or sock.
    For they have no respect for the flag

    Report Post »  
    • TXPilot
      Posted on March 24, 2012 at 12:52pm

      It’s about time, that the states start telling the Federal Govt to get lost.

      Report Post » TXPilot  
    • Onowicit
      Posted on March 24, 2012 at 12:54pm

      The simple answer here is that Missouri has a right to make its own laws an ordinances. The problem in our country is that if you put FED in front of judge it means they become mini dictators to the states. We do not have a FEDERAL GOVERNMENT———-We have a FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENTS. This is why gay marriage issue has become such a big deal, And OBAMA care is the biggest deal of all. and why ROE V WADE should never have been passed. FEDERAL JUDGES need to be put into place by our ELECTED officials in congress. hold your local reps accountable its the only way to stop this Federal over reach.

      Report Post » Onowicit  
    • Onowicit
      Posted on March 24, 2012 at 1:08pm

      His free speech for sure, But I would have kicked his … lest anyone think I’m all mouth. I have stood in the middle of about 60 Muslims on a street corner exercising their free speech about their stupid Palestinian state. I EXERCISED MY RIGHT And YELLED ALLAH is A PIG. they went wild but no one took the offer. ( I will Not comply )

      Report Post » Onowicit  
    • Mr. Oshawott
      Posted on March 24, 2012 at 1:59pm

      @Onowicit

      “The simple answer here is that Missouri has a right to make its own laws and ordinances.”

      Yes, Missouri, as well as all the other 49 states in America, have sovereignty (not rights, in a technical sense) to conjure their own laws. However, those laws mustn‘t suppress the people’s Constitutional rights, in which Missouri’s “anti-flag desecration” law did just that. That law violated the people’s First Amendment right to free speech, including the desecration of the American flag as a sign of protest against our government. Section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment prohibits state governments from passing or enforcing laws that the federal government can’t pass or enforce (that is, laws that violate our Constitutional rights).

      Report Post » Mr. Oshawott  
    • Abraham Young
      Posted on March 24, 2012 at 2:41pm

      @MrOshowit

      Quite correct. Good post. States cannot violate the Constitution, as this law clearly does. States cannot pass certain laws, they are not supremely sovereign. This is quite clear from a reading of the founders writings:

      Some folks think the states can nullify laws it doesn’t like. Wrong, according to David Barton.

      http://www.wallbuilders.com/libissuesarticles.asp?id=46525

      Report Post »  
    • Teufel Hunden
      Posted on March 24, 2012 at 2:59pm

      The proper way to dispose of a US Flag that has become soiled involves burning. So in a way, the maggot infested whacko’s, having soiled it by merely touching it, are disposing of the flag the best way they know how. Oooorah!

      Report Post » Teufel Hunden  
    • Onowicit
      Posted on March 24, 2012 at 3:07pm

      @Mr. Oshawott
      This is not an act of free SPEECH anymore than running through the streets naked is free speech. States rights do supersede the Constitution any many ways. Gun permit laws in city’s all over the country NEW YORK for instance are trample on according to you perception of the bill of rights purpose. The slight of hand that you and many have fallen for is that the intention of the BILL OF RIGHTS is a limitation on all government toward the individual. The truth is that that the Bill of Rights is a limitation on the Federal Governments infringement on states rights. We have lost sight of this and it has cost us many freedoms that we should have control over in our local community’s. If he wants to burn a flag that’s fine unless his local municipality or county or state says it is illegal. This great BILL OF RIGHTS TRICK has fooled many. According to your understanding the Federal government can control individual rights all the way down to your mayor and you will be helpless. Once again The constitution and bill of right s were written as a limitation only to the FEDERAL GOVERNMENTS INFRINGEMENT on states rights. The States being the people. Many states can use the constitution as guidelines for their states and do.

      Report Post » Onowicit  
    • Onowicit
      Posted on March 24, 2012 at 3:25pm

      @Abraham Young
      You and Mr Barton are wrong. Federal Judges do not make laws. Our Elected Local representatives do. That’s why we have separated powers in this country, so that we do not have a dictatorship by Concentrated power named the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT and their little minions, Federal judges. The same people who say that gays can not be married in there state are the same people that say everyone has the right to own a gun. This is the slight of hand that is tricking this country. Powers are in the local and state government, we choose our laws. If the State of Florida wants to arm every citizen with a gun and outlaw gay marriage, or abortion in can. If California wants to have pigs and men marry, and outlaw guns it can. AND THE BILL OF RIGHTS IS THERE TO PROTECT THE PEOPLE FROM FEDERAL INTERVENTION on the states. UNLESS you use the doctrine of incorporation which is what they do, SLIGHT OF HAND. IF OBama care passes what will you say about the Bill of rights then, when the Feds says you are MANDATED to have insurance. I for one WILL NOT COMPLY

      Report Post » Onowicit  
    • Mr. Oshawott
      Posted on March 24, 2012 at 6:04pm

      @Onowicit

      “States’ rights do supersede the Constitution in many ways. Gun permit laws are in many cities all over the country. NEW YORK, for instance, is trampling on your rights according to your perception of the Bill of Rights’ purpose. The slight-of-hand that you and many have fallen for is that the intention of the BILL OF RIGHTS is a limitation on all government toward the individual. The truth is that the Bill of Rights is a limitation on the federal government‘s infringement on states’ rights.”

      With all due respect, Onowicit, much of your statement is nonsense. It’s actually YOU and many others that has fallen for the slight-of-hand that state governments can pass any laws they want, even if they’re un-Constitutional. Yes, the states did what they wanted in the past, but when the incorporation doctrine was implemented in the 1890′s, the states no longer had that allowance, meaning that the states had to abide by the Fourteenth Amendment’s clause of due process. However, you are right in that the states are allowed to pass laws CURTAILING gun ownership. They just can’t pass laws that BARS people from having guns.

      Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incorporation_of_the_Bill_of_Rights

      Report Post » Mr. Oshawott  
    • Onowicit
      Posted on March 24, 2012 at 8:50pm

      @Mr. Oshawott
      nonsense! that is exactly the word for the incorporation doctrine.It has been so arbitrarily used that no one seems to have the energy to fight against its abuse.Most people would not even know that it exist and that it has been the Great Manipulation tool for destroying the Founding fathers intentions For a harness on Centralized power. This use of this Doctrine is Evil and It is this cause of so many ills in our country. I am surprised by a man of your understanding that you can not see this. Its use and intention has all but destroyed the concept of We the people and has allowed elitist Federal judges not only to interpret law but to MAKE law. SLIGHT OF HAND and you know it. If the people of California do not want Gay marriage and VOTE on it, In steps a Federal judge and OVERULES the will of the people.This is evil and you know it. We as a country are heading down an ugly road because of the federal dictatorship and your precious incorporation doctrine that is being misinterpreted and Arbitrarily abused. We are a FEDERATION of POWERS and some states will fight for that freedom. It has been done before and if this road continues it will again. We have heard the winds of states rights blowing again because of federal over reach. As educated as you are on this subject you should not fall prey to what you know as an abject abuse of power of FEDERAL JUDGES arbitrary rulings and making of laws that are not in their power over the will of the people.

      Report Post » Onowicit  
    • Mr. Oshawott
      Posted on March 24, 2012 at 11:33pm

      @Onowicit

      “Nonsense! That is exactly the word for the incorporation doctrine. It has been so arbitrarily used that no one seems to have the energy to fight against its abuse. Most people would not even know that it exists…It has been the Great Manipulation Tool for destroying the Founding Fathers’ intentions for a harness of centralized power. This use of this doctrine is evil and it is the cause of so many ills in our country.”

      In other words, you’re saying that the federal judge has “evilly abused” the so-called “Great Manipulation Tool” to declare a freedom-overriding law un-Constitutional and that we should allow our state governments to pass any sort of laws they want, even if some of those laws may be un-Constitutional? If that’s the case, then we may very well say bye-bye to our Ninth, Tenth, and Fourteenth Amendment rights, since that will mean we‘ll be living under a dictatorship that’s BOTH federally and state-sponsored. There‘ll be virtually no escape from the government’s overreaching un-Constitutional power from both levels.

      Report Post » Mr. Oshawott  
    • Mr. Oshawott
      Posted on March 24, 2012 at 11:33pm

      @Onowicit (cont.)

      “If the people of California does not want gay marriage and VOTE on it, in steps a federal judge and OVERRULES the will of the people.”

      The reason for that is that the vote is a violation of the First Amendment right to free speech. The government, be it state or federal, has no authorization from the Constitution to establish nor prohibit a definition of marriage of any sort. Perhaps it’s about time you started reading Section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment:

      “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abrige the privileges and immunities of the citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

      Report Post » Mr. Oshawott  
    • FindOut
      Posted on March 25, 2012 at 1:26pm

      You are so right.
      Not all liberals would burn the American Flag.
      But I would take a wild guees and syy that 95% of those who burn the flag are liberals.
      No need to say who they vote for.

      Report Post »  
  • momprayn
    Posted on March 24, 2012 at 12:16pm

    How about claiming it’s HATE speech??
    It’s like the Founders said, if this country ever got to the point where the majority were not MORAL (which includes being patriotic, respectful, etc.), we could not survive as a Republic. Well, that’s what happened — the country has become very immoral in nearly all areas – forget how many label themselves as “Christian”. Just b/c you label yourself such, doesn’t mean you really are and live it. It’s my observation the “majority” aren’t – at least you can say TOO MANY. Didn’t stand up and be vigilent & let it happen at the least….families destroyed, etc. The ugly evils of secularism, liberalism have pretty much taken over all our important areas. It will now take “enough” of us to repent and get back to God in a very serious manner & pray that He will have mercy and intervene to restore us.

    Report Post »  
    • Winedude
      Posted on March 24, 2012 at 2:03pm

      I too find any desecration of the American flag to be totally disrespectful. That being said, I also believe that anyone has a right to burn the flag or treat it in any other disrespectful manner under the first amendment’s “Free Speech” clause. We live in a country where we need to respect each other’s beliefs, whether or not we agree. Samuel Johnson once stated that “Patriotism is the refuge of scoundrels.” It‘s not that I don’t believe in patriotism; I just don’t hide behind it either. As to God, there isn’t enough room here for me to comment…

      Report Post »  
    • soybomb315
      Posted on March 24, 2012 at 4:19pm

      hate speech is a farce created by liberals and socialist extremists. If you want to jump on their ‘hate speech’ crusade – that is very dangerous. Any tool or agenda not founded in the constitution will be used to increase the power of the government and bring the people to their knees.

      so if they arent allowed to burn the flag anymore – dont you think they will find other ways to express themselves? Dont expect laws to fix the morality of the people.

      Report Post » soybomb315  
  • soybomb315
    Posted on March 24, 2012 at 12:01pm

    if you think government (state OR federal) should be able to tell us what we can and cant do with the american flag – you are building them another bridge that they will use to spread their tentacles into another part of your life. Why would we want to give a corrupt government and obama another avenue with which to attack us?

    Report Post » soybomb315  
  • youdidthis
    Posted on March 24, 2012 at 11:57am

    INS DOC FOUND: U.S. CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO ONE
    EAST AFRICAN-BORN CHILD OF U.S. CITIZEN IN 1961!
    http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2012/03/ins-record-found-showing-certificate-of.html

    Report Post »  
  • youdidthis
    Posted on March 24, 2012 at 11:54am

    is free speech…sick twisted free speech.
    many american died protecting the flag and what it represents.
    many died so corksockers could have that freedom.

    it is called respect and honor…guess some would know nothing about that…

    Report Post »  
    • tifosa
      Posted on March 24, 2012 at 12:08pm

      Some would consider expressing lies, vile vitriol, regarding the duly elected President of the United States a dishonor and disrespect. Would you want states to have the right to create a law which violates your Constitutional right to do so?

      Report Post » tifosa  
    • youdidthis
      Posted on March 24, 2012 at 1:13pm

      tifosa.

      is no law against the truth.

      your illegal pos is on the way out, the rats are jumping ship.
      arpaio is doing a criminal investigation.
      charges will be brought against all involved.

      duly elected…bs. fraud from day one. never vetted.
      this sob could not get a job at mcdonalds.

      have anymore bs , or are you still being fed msm script.?

      Report Post »  
    • fixer
      Posted on March 24, 2012 at 1:32pm

      hey tifosa,whats the matter…don’t like the truth when it hits you between the eyes? trying hard to see things from your point of view…but i can’t get my head that far up my ass.

      Report Post »  
  • chips1
    Posted on March 24, 2012 at 11:49am

    How’s this soung? Take your Federal crap and get out of Missouri. Also, why didn’t they just find him guilty of littering? They try to make everything soooo complicated. Enforce the current laws and start getting rid of the stupid ones. That should keep them busy for a hundred years.

    Report Post »  
    • Mr. Oshawott
      Posted on March 24, 2012 at 12:16pm

      @Chips1

      “Enforce the current laws and start getting rid of the stupid ones.”

      The federal judge did just that, getting rid of a stupid law. Missouri’s “anti-flag desecration” law is a stupid law because it violates the right to free speech under the First Amendment. Have a look at Section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment in one of my statements above for further explanation.

      Report Post » Mr. Oshawott  
  • RodT82721
    Posted on March 24, 2012 at 11:43am

    Since the flag is not mentioned in the Constitution, and according to that same Constitution anything not included is left to the states and the people. So just where does this judge come off telling the state they have to change their state laws?

    Federal judges are always sticking their noses where they have no business – their problem is enforcing their personal decisions.
    I seem to remember a Fed judge telling Barry had to lift that drilling ban in the Gulf – nothing happened – so he said it again! Barry ignored his finding and look what happened – nothing!

    States not only have rights, they also have the force to enforce their own laws. Let the judge pound sand. JMO.

    Report Post »  
    • soybomb315
      Posted on March 24, 2012 at 11:59am

      this is a free speech case my friend. Just like when we stand outside holding anti-obamacare signs and give money to associations that criticize big government

      Report Post » soybomb315  
  • Itsjusttim
    Posted on March 24, 2012 at 11:25am

    Yeah people should have changed the Pledge of Allegiance a long time ago. It should have began: I pledge allegiance to “The Republic” of the United States of America. Because after years and years of Rote, the only line anyone thinks about anymore is the first-line, and the rest comes out of their mouth reflexively. Oh well, ya can’t fix stupid.

    Report Post » Itsjusttim  
    • Itsjusttim
      Posted on March 24, 2012 at 11:38am

      One especially can not fix stupid, when it is sealed in with arrogance. Because then there’s no stone that can penetrate that thick outer shell of arrogance, except to crush it like a potters vase.

      Report Post » Itsjusttim  
    • Itsjusttim
      Posted on March 24, 2012 at 11:48am

      Incidentally, that word “Stone” and the way I just used it to describe penetrating your arrogance with new thought, is the exact same way it is used in the Bible where it says David slung a stone, and it sunk into Goliath’s Forehead. But you probably won’t even believe that because you have very, very thick foreheads.

      Report Post » Itsjusttim  
    • tifosa
      Posted on March 24, 2012 at 11:50am

      Seems to me the epitome of arrogance is to want to change the PoA to meet their own dogmatic ends.

      Report Post » tifosa  
    • Itsjusttim
      Posted on March 24, 2012 at 11:51am

      Oh but don’t listen to me, because you see the world through your eye’s; your thoughts; and your own image in-self; therefore it must be that I just think I’m perfect like you do.

      Report Post » Itsjusttim  
    • Itsjusttim
      Posted on March 24, 2012 at 11:58am

      tifosa,
      Yeah, schools and Liberal Professors do not like to practice dogmatism now do they? Oh wait, yes they do, that’s why they burn the flag, because that’s the part of the Pledge of Allegiance they know everyone recalls with little deep thought, and if people can crush that, then they will crush the rest of the Rote that follows the first line.

      Report Post » Itsjusttim  
    • Itsjusttim
      Posted on March 24, 2012 at 12:09pm

      There’s so many truths that people could learn which the Bible actually means, but once Liberty is the rest of the way extinguished from America, that just won’t happen in your lifetimes, and I’ll have to go back to my cave.

      Report Post » Itsjusttim  
    • Itsjusttim
      Posted on March 24, 2012 at 12:15pm

      And I don’t mean the kind of caves that 30 million people in China are reported to be living in. I mean the spiritual cave I have been living in for several decades because I caught wind the evil forces wanted to kill me with football, baseball, and all sorts of idolatry.

      Report Post » Itsjusttim  
    • Itsjusttim
      Posted on March 24, 2012 at 12:24pm

      There used to be some earth people could get a footing on whereby they would somewhat understand all those things. But now the Lord is going to bring the potter’s hammer.

      Report Post » Itsjusttim  
  • Itsjusttim
    Posted on March 24, 2012 at 11:17am

    Oh I can’t believe people like burning that flag; that wonderful flag; that flag everyone is focused on; that, flag, flag, flag. There’s just far too many zombies walking around.

    Report Post » Itsjusttim  
  • tifosa
    Posted on March 24, 2012 at 11:16am

    Since when is violating the First Amendment “patriotic?” There is no Constitutional Amendment that protects the flag. period.

    Report Post » tifosa  
    • Mr. Oshawott
      Posted on March 24, 2012 at 11:37am

      @Tifosa

      Amen to that. Even flag desecration is counted as free speech under the First Amendment.

      Report Post » Mr. Oshawott  
  • Baddoggy
    Posted on March 24, 2012 at 11:07am

    It cannot be a FEDERAL law. That is a FACT. Unless you ammend the Constitution it is a STATE issue. But you can have a law at the State level that would have nothing to do with free speech issues. The State can make squelch this freedom of expression and speech or they can allow it…

    People do not realize that the STATES can make laws taking away your rights. Just look at what they have done in some States with gun laws…The problem is that the FEDERAL Government puts the thumb on the States for control…that makes a @hitstorm…

    Report Post » Baddoggy  
    • soybomb315
      Posted on March 24, 2012 at 11:22am

      sorry baddoggy i must disagree on this one

      The states do not have the ability to infringe upon our natural rights. It wasnt always this way, as some NE states used to have state religion and other states violated 4th ammendment. However, the 14th ammendment changed everything via the incorporation doctrine. If the constitution prevents the federal government from doing something – the same applies to the states.

      Yeah, a state can RESTRICT gun ownership via checks and waiting periods but they cannot eliminate it. That was the supreme court case a few years ago in Chicago – the court said the city went too far and infringed upon our right to own guns. Tthis is also the reason romneycare is unconstitutional – despite mitt romney going around saying that MASS has the authority to do it at the state level.

      Here is the overview
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incorporation_of_the_Bill_of_Rights

      Report Post » soybomb315  
    • Mr. Oshawott
      Posted on March 24, 2012 at 12:01pm

      @BadDoggy

      I’m sorry to say, but SoyBomb315 has it right. Section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment states:

      “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abriged the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

      Therefore, you really ought to be frightened whenever your state government decides to assist the federal government in suppressing your natural rights.

      Report Post » Mr. Oshawott  
    • justangry
      Posted on March 24, 2012 at 12:07pm

      Also Baddoggy, it violates the Missouri State Constitution’s section 8.

      Section 8. That no law shall be passed impairing the freedom of speech, no matter by what means communicated: that every person shall be free to say, write or publish, or otherwise communicate whatever he will on any subject, being responsible for all abuses of that liberty; and that in all suits and prosecutions for libel or slander the truth thereof may be given in evidence; and in suits and prosecutions for libel the jury, under the direction of the court, shall determine the law and the facts.

      So I really don’t understand why it had to make it to the federal court in the first place. I guess lawyers need money for justice…. or something like that.

      Report Post » justangry  
    • Baddoggy
      Posted on March 24, 2012 at 2:55pm

      Sorry guys but you are wrong…infringing is infringing…If they can do it with gun ownership they can do it with speech.

      Report Post » Baddoggy  
  • Mr. Oshawott
    Posted on March 24, 2012 at 11:06am

    I got to agree with the federal judge‘s ruling that declared Missouri’s “anti-flag desecration” law un-Constitutional. Yes, I understand that there are some people that can’t stand to see the American flag cut into pieces, stepped on, or burned to a crisp, but we have to remind ourselves that even flag desecration is a Constitutional right of free speech under the First Amendment. Our Founding Fathers risked their lives to defend LIBERTY, not the American flag. The American flag is merely a symbol of our country.

    Report Post » Mr. Oshawott  
    • soybomb315
      Posted on March 24, 2012 at 11:42am

      you are spot on. it is a tragedy – but that doesnt mean it should be illegal.

      lets focus on the unconstitutional things the government is doing like obamacare, subsidies, undeclared wars, detention/spying/assasination of americans, and some of the taxes they are levying

      Report Post » soybomb315  
  • MKDAWUSS
    Posted on March 24, 2012 at 10:59am

    But if you desecrated a foreign flag…

    But just in regards to the US flag, what does this say about respect to the US Flag Code?

    Report Post » MKDAWUSS  
  • PubliusPencilman
    Posted on March 24, 2012 at 10:46am

    If Conservatives treated their fellow citizens with as much concern and compassion as they treat the American flag, they’d be Liberals!

    Report Post »  
    • TSUNAMI-22
      Posted on March 24, 2012 at 11:17am

      @ PubliusPencilman

      If Conservatives treated their fellow citizens with as much concern and compassion as they treat the American flag, they’d be Liberals!
      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
      We try, but you liberals keep getting in the way of common sense.

      Report Post »  
  • term limits for congress
    Posted on March 24, 2012 at 10:44am

    Stop calling it the American Flag. Start calling it a Quoron [spelling]. = Auto-Protected.

    Report Post »  
  • raderby
    Posted on March 24, 2012 at 10:43am

    1. Who appointed Carol the Judge? wanna bet Bill Clinton?
    2. On what legal basis is the flag law UNconstitutional? No where do I see the synopsis of what the fool judge said in the ruling……

    Report Post » raderby  
    • tifosa
      Posted on March 24, 2012 at 11:08am

      Which Constitutional Amendment protects the American flag?

      Report Post » tifosa  
  • Plaid Chameleon
    Posted on March 24, 2012 at 10:43am

    This Federal Judge is unconstitutional. Who appointed this clown?

    Report Post »  
    • Mr. Oshawott
      Posted on March 24, 2012 at 11:31am

      @Plaid Chameleon

      Where in the Constitution does it say that the people are prohibited from desecrating the American flag?

      Report Post » Mr. Oshawott  
  • HKS
    Posted on March 24, 2012 at 10:40am

    This is not something for a liberal judge to decide. The people should decide this.

    Report Post » HKS  
    • Mr. Oshawott
      Posted on March 24, 2012 at 11:27am

      @HKS

      “This is not something for a liberal judge to decide.”

      …Unless the state’s law goes against the Constitution, which is clearly the case here. Whether the judge was liberal or conservative has no relevance in this situation.

      Report Post » Mr. Oshawott  
  • EqualJustice
    Posted on March 24, 2012 at 10:34am

    The only way to save out flag is to change the laws protecting her.

    Report Post » EqualJustice  
    • dissentnow
      Posted on March 24, 2012 at 11:00am

      Our flag doesn’t need to be protected. Our liberties need to be protected. I would never burn the flag but i should have the right to do so. What is next? Making it a crime to desecrate a picture of the president? Making it a crime to desecrate a copy of a bill signed into law by the president? Where does it stop? Burning the flag is, on one hand, horrible but, on the other hand, being ABLE to burn the flag is symbolic of what makes our country and our freedoms so great. We have the right to dissent and protest our government without fear of our government punishing us for doing so. We should celebrate those freedoms; not try to pass laws taking them away. Try going to North Korea and burning their flag. See how far that gets you.

      Report Post »  
    • tifosa
      Posted on March 24, 2012 at 11:10am

      Done DissentNow, it’s called the First Amendment.

      Report Post » tifosa  
    • dissentnow
      Posted on March 24, 2012 at 11:19am

      @TIFOSA
      yeah, i really don’t think that you read my post. Try reading it again.

      Report Post »  
    • tifosa
      Posted on March 24, 2012 at 11:27am

      Thanks DN, I read it and was agreeing :^)

      Report Post » tifosa  
    • dissentnow
      Posted on March 24, 2012 at 11:35am

      @TIF
      No problem

      Report Post »  
1 2

Sign In To Post Comments! Sign In

Sign Up For Our Newsletter!

Glenn Beck Radio

Listen to Glenn Beck 24/7 Listen Now
Restoring Love