5. In the case of Texas v. Johnson, the Supreme Court held that freedom of speech

means more than just words. Cite an example of symbolic speech. Do you agree

that the First Amendment should protect this kind of symbolic speech? Why or

why not?

In the case Texas v. Johnson (1989), burning of the American flag was considered a form of symbolic speech that is protected by the Constitution. The Supreme Court argued that some actions may anger people, but social outrage alone can't be a justification for limiting freedom of speech.

Example: The Iowa state legislature passes a new libel law that is contested by local associations of journalists. They say some aspects of it will limit freedom of speech and freedom of the press. They organize protests and even promise to take the issue to the Supreme Court if necessary. As part of their street protests, they gag themselves with white handkerchiefs and march in silence. This is symbolic speech.

I agree with the argument of the Supreme Court that symbolic speech has to be equally protected by the First Amendment as far as no life or property is in danger. To limit or punish some forms of protest just because a social group or large numbers of people don't like it, may have serious consequences for citizens'freedoms and rights, it may open the door to future restrictions.