表达自由:言论与行为的两分法——从国旗案看美国最高法院的几个原则

Freedom of Expression: The Speech-Action Dichotomy in the case of U.S. Supreme Court's Principles Regarding Flag Desecration

本文以焚烧美国国旗的宪法纷争为案由 ,讨论了美国言论自由问题中的言论与行为的两分法原则。行为在什么情况下可以享有与口头的言辞同样的宪法保护 ,即相当于言辞 ;在什么情况下不能享有与言辞同样的待遇 ,最高法院在长期的实践中一直摇摆不定。大法官们引入了诸如象征性表达、言论附加、表达性行为等概念来处理不同的涉及宪法第一条修正案的诉讼 ,最终在 1989年的“得克萨斯诉约翰逊”

With constitutional disputes in cases of flag desecration as the main point, this article discusses the speech-action dichotomy in the American freedom of speech. On what conditions action can be put under equal constitutional protection as oral speech, or is equal to oral speech, and on what conditions action can not be, the Supreme Court has been wavering. The justices introduced the concepts of symbolic expression, speech-plus, and expressive conduct to deal with different lawsuits related to the first amendment of the Constitution and finally reached a clearer norm in the 'Texas vs. Johnson' case of 1989.