Brief 7 Court Cases Term Paper

Court Briefs - 7 Different Cases

Business Case

Texas v. Johnson

Real Properties Case

Jeffrey A. Beard, Secretary, Pennsylvania Department Of Corrections, Petitioner V.

Ronald Banks, Individually And On Behalf Of All Others Similarly Situated

Intellectual Properties

Eric Eldred, Et Al., Petitioners V. John D. Ashcroft, Attorney General

Business and the Bill of Rights

Humana Inc., Et Al., Petitioners V. Mary Forsyth Et Al.

Administrative Agency

Timothy Booth, Petitioner V.C.O. Churner et al.

Torts Relating to Business

Douglas Spector, Et Al., Petitioners V. Norwegian Cruise Line Ltd.

Contracts

Montana, Et Al., Petitioners V. Crow Tribe of Indians Et al

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Business Case

Texas v. Johnson

U.S. No. 88-155 (1989)

Facts: In 1984, during the Republican National Convention in Dallas, Texas while participating in the "Republican War Chest Tour," deemed to be a political demonstration, Gregory Lee Johnson was charged with the criminal offence of... "the desecration of a venerated object in violation of Tex.Penal Code Ann. 42.09(a)(3) (1989)."

Issue(s): Is the ruling against Gregory Lee Johnson for the violation of TexPenal Code Ann. 42.09(a)(3) (1989) to be confirmed?

Issue(s): Is the conviction of Gregory Lee Johnson consistent with the First Amendment?

Buy full paper
for $19.77 Ruling: The Court of Criminal Appeals ruled, "No," regarding the issue in this case.

Term Paper on Brief 7 Court Cases Assignment

Analysis: In reaching the decision to overrule the lower court's The Court of Criminal Appeals determined that Johnson's conduct.".. was symbolic speech protected by the First Amendment: Given the context of an organized demonstration, speeches, slogans, and the distribution of literature, anyone who observed appellant's act would have understood the message that appellant intended to convey. The act for which appellant was convicted was clearly 'speech' contemplated by the First Amendment. reversed Johnson's conviction on the ground that 42.09 was unconstitutional as applied to him... The state court did not address Johnson's argument that the statute was, on its face, unconstitutionally vague and overbroad. We granted certiorari, 488 U.S. 907 (1988), and now affirm." Highlighted part will be rewritten.

Because it reversed Johnson's conviction on the ground that 42.09 was unconstitutional as applied to him, the state court did not address Johnson's argument that the statute was, on its face, unconstitutionally vague and overbroad. We granted certiorari, 488 U.S. 907 (1988), and now affirm.

Minority Rationale

The Minority rationale contends that Johnson's "... conduct may be prohibited and, indeed, criminally sanctioned, because "his act... conveyed nothing that could not have been conveyed and was not conveyed just as forcefully in a dozen different ways." Post at 431. Not only does this assertion sit uneasily next to the dissent's quite correct reminder that the flag occupies a unique position in our society -- which demonstrates that messages conveyed without use of the flag are not "just as forcefu[l]" as those conveyed with it -- but it also ignores the fact that, in Spence, supra, we "rejected summarily" this very claim. See 418 U.S. At 411, n. 4." Highlighted part will be rewritten.

Comments: To be added.

Texas v. Johnson remained in the litigation process 5 years.

The jurisdiction for this case is the Supreme Court of the United States.

II. Real Properties Case

Jeffrey A. Beard, Secretary, Pennsylvania Department Of Corrections, Petitioner V.

Ronald Banks, Individually And On Behalf Of All Others Similarly… [END OF PREVIEW] . . . READ MORE