I’m interested in better understanding why some actions constitute speech, but other actions don’t. Setting aside the politics of the moment, Reading the text of the amendment, it seems like a real stretch to go from the text to “burning a flag is infringement of first amendment, but libel can be prosecuted without infringing.
From the article, here is the justification:
>> [anti flag burning policy] is a content-based, indeed viewpoint-based, enforcement policy.
From the article, here is the justification: >> [anti flag burning policy] is a content-based, indeed viewpoint-based, enforcement policy.