BACKGROUND: The flag burning amendment to the Constitution is an attempt to protect the American flag from desecration. The amendment is seen as necessary because the Supreme Court has twice ruled that flag burning is a protected form of expression. The House resolution states that, "The Congress and the United States shall have the power to prohibit the physical desecration of the flag of the United States." Debate centers around the meaning and definition of "desecration" and "flag". Amendments to more precisely define "desecration" and "the flag" have been defeated. The amendment needs to pass both chambers of Congress by a two-thirds margin and approved by three-fourths (38) of the states. The President does not need to sign the amendment.

KEY PLAYERS: The House Resolution (H.J. Res 79) is sponsored by Rep. Gerald B. H. Solomon (R-NY) and 281 other co-sponsors. The Senate Resolution (S. J. Res 31) is sponsored by Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT). The resolutions were referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary and the Senate Committee on the Judiciary. The House Resolution has also been sent to the House Constitution Subcommittee.

STATUS: The House version of the Flag Burning amendment (H.J. Res 79) was passed (312-120) on June 28, 1995 by twenty-two more votes than was necessary. On July 20, 1995 the Senate Judiciary Committee approved an identical resolution (S. 31) by a 12-6 margin.

PRO: Supporters argue that the amendment is necessary to protect our national symbol from mistreatment and should not be hindered by freedom of speech arguments. They point to the fact that 49 states have resolutions that call for this amendment.

"This amendment will not infringe on anyone's first amendment rights. We are the most tolerant country on Earth when it comes to dissent and criticism of our government. But I really draw the line on the physical desecration of this great flag. I think the American people agree." -- Rep. G.V. Montgomery (D-MS)

CON: Opponents argue that the amendment is a violation of First Amendment right to free speech and that this would be the first alteration to the Bill of Rights. Furthermore, opponents point to the vague wording of the amendment in its definition of what constitutes "desecration" and a "flag". They say that there is currently no epidemic of flag burning, so the amendment is not necessary.

"I deplore flag burning, but I am concerned by amending the Constitution we will be elevating a symbol of liberty over the liberty that it protects and provides itself. What I mean is that the true test of any nation's commitment to freedom, to freedom of expression, lies in its ability to protect unpopular expression such as flag desecration." -- Rep. John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI)

WHAT'S NEXT: The Senate's version of the resolution now moves to the Senate floor for debate where support is less certain than in the House.