I guess this was inevitable. We’re engaged in a war, the Republican majority has expanded, so it’s only natural that we’ll have to deal with a constitutional amendment to ban flag burning.
South Dakota’s new U.S. senator, who defeated a politician who didn’t think a flag-desecration amendment was needed in the Constitution, says he will sponsor just such an amendment.
Congress has debated a flag amendment nearly every year since the Supreme Court ruled in 1989 that flag-burning is a form of speech protected by the Constitution.
But things will change if Sen. John Thune, R-S.D., has his way. Thune said that he, Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, and others would introduce the amendment soon and that both Democrats and Republicans had agreed to co-sponsor it.
Thune’s proposal would presumably mirror a companion bill in the House, which already has 83 co-sponsors.
I’ll spare you the litany of reasons this amendment is ridiculous; if you’re reading this site, I’ll just assume you’re well aware of the merits (or lack thereof) of this ploy. (Though, if you’re feeling rusty, there are some pretty good talking points here.)
Instead, let’s consider whether this is worth worrying about. The amendment has passed the House five times over the last 15 years, but fallen short in the Senate every time, sometimes by the narrowest of margins.
Now, however, the GOP majority has 55 members. And a war to exploit. And a desire to change the subject away from Social Security. And a president who’ll endorse the measure enthusiastically.
One advocacy group that works on this issue (from a pro-amendment perspective) claims that there are 65 senators who are on record supporting the amendment. For passage, they’ll need 67.
Start worrying.