SCOTUS has previously ruled that burning the American flag is protected speech, but I believe they have upheld (or just not heard cases against) state laws that burning crosses is hate speech or threatening speech (which are not protected.)
Yes, SCOTUS has consistently ruled that threats of violence are different than protesting.
Burning a cross on someone’s lawn is an implicit threat of future violence because that is the only historical use of burning crosses on someone’s lawn. Burning a flag in a public space is saying you disagree with the government, which is a protest.
Burning a cross in America is not a message that you hate Christians. It’s deeply associated with the racist organization the ku klux klan and their extrajudicial murders of black people.
So yeah you can do the thing associated with being mad at a country but not the thing associated with “get your melinated skin in line as per our beliefs or we kill your entire family”
SCOTUS has previously ruled that burning the American flag is protected speech, but I believe they have upheld (or just not heard cases against) state laws that burning crosses is hate speech or threatening speech (which are not protected.)
Yes, SCOTUS has consistently ruled that threats of violence are different than protesting.
Burning a cross on someone’s lawn is an implicit threat of future violence because that is the only historical use of burning crosses on someone’s lawn. Burning a flag in a public space is saying you disagree with the government, which is a protest.
Burning a cross in America is not a message that you hate Christians. It’s deeply associated with the racist organization the ku klux klan and their extrajudicial murders of black people.
So yeah you can do the thing associated with being mad at a country but not the thing associated with “get your melinated skin in line as per our beliefs or we kill your entire family”