[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

"There’s a Word for the West’s Appeasement of Militant Islam"

"The Bondi Beach Jihad: Sharia Supremacism and Jew Hatred, Again"

"This Is How We Win a New Cold War With China"

"How Europe Fell Behind"

"The Epstein Conspiracy in Plain Sight"

Saint Nicholas The Real St. Nick

Will Atheists in China Starve Due to No Fish to Eat?

A Thirteen State Solution for the Holy Land?

US Sends new Missle to a Pacific ally, angering China and Russia Moscow and Peoking

DeaTh noTice ... Freerepublic --- lasT Monday JR died

"‘We Are Not the Crazy Ones’: AOC Protests Too Much"

"Rep. Comer to Newsmax: No Evidence Biden Approved Autopen Use"

"Donald Trump Has Broken the Progressive Ratchet"

"America Must Slash Red Tape to Make Nuclear Power Great Again!!"

"Why the DemocRATZ Activist Class Couldn’t Celebrate the Cease-Fire They Demanded"

Antifa Calls for CIVIL WAR!

British Police Make an Arrest...of a White Child Fishing in the Thames

"Sanctuary" Horde ASSAULTS Chicago... ELITE Marines SMASH Illegals Without Mercy

Trump hosts roundtable on ANTIFA

What's happening in Britain. Is happening in Ireland. The whole of Western Europe.

"The One About the Illegal Immigrant School Superintendent"

CouldnÂ’t believe he let me pet him at the end (Rhino)

Cops Go HANDS ON For Speaking At Meeting!

POWERFUL: Charlie Kirk's final speech delivered in South Korea 9/6/25

2026 in Bible Prophecy

2.4 Billion exposed to excessive heat

🔴 LIVE CHICAGO PORTLAND ICE IMMIGRATION DETENTION CENTER 24/7 PROTEST 9/28/2025

Young Conservative Proves Leftist Protesters Wrong

England is on the Brink of Civil War!

Charlie Kirk Shocks Florida State University With The TRUTH

IRL Confronting Protesters Outside UN Trump Meeting

The UK Revolution Has Started... Brit's Want Their Country Back

Inside Paris Dangerous ANTIFA Riots

Rioters STORM Chicago ICE HQ... "Deportation Unit" SCRAPES Invaders Off The Sidewalk

She Decoded A Specific Part In The Bible

Muslim College Student DUMBFOUNDED as Charlie Kirk Lists The Facts About Hamas

Charlie Kirk EVISCERATES Black Students After They OPENLY Support “Anti-White Racism” HEATED DEBATE

"Trump Rips U.N. as Useless During General Assembly Address: ‘Empty Words’"

Charlie Kirk VS the Wokies at University of Tennessee

Charlie Kirk Takes on 3 Professors & a Teacher

British leftist student tells Charlie Kirk facts are unfair

The 2 Billion View Video: Charlie Kirk's Most Viewed Clips of 2024

Antifa is now officially a terrorist organization.

The Greatness of Charlie Kirk: An Eyewitness Account of His Life and Martyrdom

Charlie Kirk Takes on Army of Libs at California's UCR

DR. ALVEDA KING: REST IN PEACE CHARLIE KIRK

Steven Bonnell wants to murder Americans he disagrees with

What the fagots LGBTQ really means

I watched Charlie Kirk get assassinated. This is my experience.

Elon Musk Delivers Stunning Remarks At Historic UK March (Tommy Robinson)


Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

United States News
See other United States News Articles

Title: Army veteran arrested for hanging US flag upside down in protest
Source: FOX News
URL Source: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/08/1 ... ag-upside-down-in-protest.html
Published: Aug 15, 2016
Author: FoxNews.com
Post Date: 2016-08-16 09:14:44 by Deckard
Keywords: None
Views: 1119
Comments: 12

An Iowa man was arrested Thursday and was charged with desecrating the U.S. flag after hanging it upside down beneath a Chinese flag in protest at his home.

The Fort Dodge Messenger reported that Homer Martz, an Army veteran, of Somers, put up the flag to protest an oil pipeline being built without his consent next to a well that supplies water to his home. Martz said he was arrested by Calhoun County sheriffs at around 11 a.m.

"They said, 'You can't do this. We have a statute.' I said I'm sorry but you shouldn't have took them down," Martz told The Messenger. "So I walked back out and put them back up, and they arrested me."

Calhoun County Attorney Tina Meth-Farrington said that Martz faces simple misdemeanor and if convicted he could get a fine and at least 30 days in jail for a desecration charge.

Martz said he didn’t know he was breaking the law. According to Iowa code 718A, Martz was charged with a misdemeanor because he tried to "publicly mutilate, deface, defile or defy, trample upon, cast contempt upon, satirize, deride or burlesque, either by words or act, such flag, standard, color, ensign, shield, or other insignia of the United States, or flag, ensign, great seal, or other insignia of this state.”

The paper reported that if authorities fail to enforce the law, they could be removed from office.

"If they had asked me to take them down, and showed me the statute, I would have taken them down," he said. "But in my book, they trespassed by taking the flags down."

Martz protested the construction of an oil pipeline that he being built by the Texas-based company Dakota Access and will cross into Iowa. The company was granted the right to use eminent domain to take the land from landowners. The line will pass between Martz’s home and well and he fears construction will break his waterline.

Dakota Access told the paper that they will fix the line if it’s damaged during construction.

Martz said his rights were trampled on.

"I'm a soldier," he added. "When I walked to the airport in the '70s with my dress uniform on, I was spit on. I stood in front of people that were protesting, and I've been cussed at. And like I said, that's their rights. I've never infringed on their rights.

"But you know, freedom of speech, freedom to protest - people can burn the American flag," Martz said. "It's legal. That's the Supreme Court."

Click for more from The Fort Dodge Messenger.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 2.

#1. To: Deckard (#0)

Freedom of political speech, Amendment 1, trumps all state and local ordinances. He should take up the case as a 1st Amendment case, and he will win.

That he was or was not once a soldier is completely irrelevant. Soldiers are not "special" before the law. They are not more, or less, entitled. They have the same first amendment rights as everybody else, and the right to make a political statement by hanging the flag upside down under the Chinese flag - could there be a more obvious and direct political statement than that? What he means is obvious - is pretty much absolute.

Iowa or that locality have some laws, and local officials have enforced them. The United States has a law of political speech that is superior to, and more important than, those local laws and local sensitivities. If this man fights this in court, he will most certainly eventually win at the federal level. It's a no-brainer.

The Republican Right should take on this case, but they won't, so it is to be hoped that the ACLU will step up to the plate here.

Vicomte13  posted on  2016-08-16   10:02:19 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#2. To: Vicomte13 (#1)

Iowa or that locality have some laws, and local officials have enforced them.

Although the U.S. Supreme Court has twice invalidated state flag laws, 47 states still have on the books laws, many modeled after the Uniform Flag Law of 1917, that prohibit the desecration of the flag or its use for advertising and publicity purposes.

Gatlin  posted on  2016-08-16   10:28:27 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 2.

#3. To: Gatlin (#2)

Although the U.S. Supreme Court has twice invalidated state flag laws, 47 states still have on the books laws, many modeled after the Uniform Flag Law of 1917, that prohibit the desecration of the flag or its use for advertising and publicity purposes.

That's fine. In this case, the flag is not being descrated. It's being used to make clear political speech, and that is protected by the First Amendment. If the man in the case goes to court, he will certainly win.

Vicomte13  posted on  2016-08-16 10:33:55 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#8. To: Gatlin, Vicomte13 (#2)

Spence v. Washington, 418 U.S. 405 (1974)

Syllabus

For displaying out of his apartment window a United States flag upside down with a peace symbol taped thereto, appellant was convicted under Washington's "improper use" statute forbidding the exhibition of a United States flag to which is attached or superimposed figures, symbols, or other extraneous material. He testified without contradiction at his trial that he thus displayed his flag as a protest against then-recent actions in Cambodia and fatal events at Kent State University, and that his purpose was to associate the American flag with peace instead of war and violence. The Washington Supreme Court sustained the conviction, rejecting appellant's contention, inter alia, that the improper use statute, on its face and as applied, contravened the First and Fourteenth Amendments.

Held: The statute, as applied to appellant's activity, impermissibly infringed a form of protected expression.

81 Wash.2d 788, 506 P.2d 293, reversed.

Street v. New York, 394 U.S. 576 (1969)

Syllabus

Appellant, having heard a news broadcast of the shooting of James Meredith, a civil rights leader, took an American flag which he owned to a street corner near his home in New York and ignited the flag. He was arrested and thereafter charged by information with malicious mischief for violating § 1425, subd. 16, par. d, of the New York Penal Law, which makes it a crime publicly to mutilate or "publicly [to] defy . . . or cast contempt upon [any American flag] either by words or act." The information charged appellant with burning the American flag and publicly speaking defiant or contemptuous words about the flag. Appellant unsuccessfully moved to dismiss the information on the ground that the statute violated his constitutional right to free expression by punishing him for activity which he contended was a constitutionally protected "demonstration" or "protest." Appellant was tried before a judge without a jury and convicted. The arresting officer testified that, at the time of arrest, appellant was standing on a corner speaking to a small and not unruly group, which did not block the street or sidewalk; on the opposite corner was the burning flag; appellant told the group: "We don't need no damn flag," and said to the officer, "If they let that happen to Meredith, we don't need an American flag." Appellant also challenged the constitutionality of the "words" part of the statute in the Appellate Term and in the New York Court of Appeals, both of which affirmed his conviction, the latter court upholding the constitutionality of the statute without alluding to the "words" part.

Held:

1. Appellant has met the burden of showing that the federal question of constitutionality of the "words" part of the statute was adequately raised in the state courts, by appellant's motion to dismiss in the trial court and his briefs in the appellate courts. Pp. 394 U. S. 581-585.

2. The application of § 1425, subd. 16, par. d, to appellant was violative of rights of free expression assured against state infringement by the Fourteenth Amendment, because it permitted him to be punished merely for speaking defiant or contemptuous words about the American flag. Pp. 394 U. S. 581, 394 U. S. 585-594.

(a) Appellant's conviction must be set aside if it could have been based solely upon his words, or upon both his words and his act, and if a conviction on such a basis would be unconstitutional. Stromberg v. California, 283 U. S. 359 (131); Thomas v. Collins, 323 U. S. 516 (1945). Pp. 394 U. S. 585-588.

(b) The record here is insufficient to eliminate the possibility that appellant's words were the sole basis of his conviction or that he was convicted for both his words and his deed. Pp. 394 U. S. 588-590.

(c) Appellant's conviction under § 1425, subd. 16, par. d, for speaking as he did could not be constitutionally justified on the basis that the words he uttered (1) constituted incitement to others to commit unlawful acts; (2) were so inflammatory as to provoke violent retaliation by others; (3) were (apart from the content of the ideas they conveyed) likely to shock passers-by; or (4), in the light of Board of Educ. v. Barnette, 319 U. S. 624 (1943), constituted failure by the appellant to manifest the respect which every citizen must show the flag. Pp. 394 U. S. 590-593.

20 N.Y.2d 231, 229 N.E.2d 17, reversed and remanded.

Texas v. Johnson, 491 U.S. 397 (1989)

Syllabus

During the 1984 Republican National Convention, respondent Johnson participated in a political demonstration to protest the policies of the Reagan administration and some Dallas-based corporations. After a march through the city streets, Johnson burned an American flag while protesters chanted. No one was physically injured or threatened with injury, although several witnesses were seriously offended by the flag burning. Johnson was convicted of desecration of a venerated object in violation of a Texas statute, and a state court of appeals affirmed. However, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals reversed, holding that the State, consistent with the First Amendment, could not punish Johnson for burning the flag in these circumstances. The court first found that Johnson's burning of the flag was expressive conduct protected by the First Amendment. The court concluded that the State could not criminally sanction flag desecration in order to preserve the flag as a symbol of national unity. It also held that the statute did not meet the State's goal of preventing breaches of the peace, since it was not drawn narrowly enough to encompass only those flag burnings that would likely result in a serious disturbance, and since the flag burning in this case did not threaten such a reaction. Further, it stressed that another Texas statute prohibited breaches of the peace and could be used to prevent disturbances without punishing this flag desecration.

Held: Johnson's conviction for flag desecration is inconsistent with the First Amendment. Pp. 491 U. S. 402-420.

nolu chan  posted on  2016-08-16 18:50:38 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


End Trace Mode for Comment # 2.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com