Keith Burgess-Jackson, J.D., Ph.D.

6-27-89 The reaction to the United States Supreme Court’s ruling [Texas v. Johnson, 491 U.S. 397 (1989)] on flag desecration has been heated and vociferous. To my knowledge, no politician at any level—federal, state, or local—supports it. Even the president, George [Herbert Walker] Bush, has gotten into the act. From the first, he has said that he opposes the Court’s ruling, but today he went further, calling for a constitutional amendment that would permit state legislatures or Congress to ban flag desecration. I wonder what the amendment would look like. It would have to change the First Amendment, since that’s what the Court used to strike down the flag-desecration statutes. Perhaps it would state that the First Amendment shall not be construed to protect those who desecrate, destroy, or dishonor the United States flag. Though I have nothing against constitutional amendments, this is certainly not the time, place, or issue to amend the Constitution. At today’s press conference, a journalist asked Bush why he is so adamant about the desecration issue and not at all concerned about a balanced-budget amendment. The juxtaposition of these issues is mind-boggling, and it obviously caught the president off guard. Here is the president of the United States, with massive budget and trade deficits to worry about, and he’s devoting his time and energy to flag desecration. This symbolizes our age, in which symbols are more important than substance. But then, I expect no more from Bush, who focused his 1988 presidential campaign on a cluster of symbols: the pledge of allegiance, the American Civil Liberties Union, and the word “liberal”. This president can’t distinguish the important from the unimportant.