Ah, The Flag Protection Act of 1989.
What part of *I consider* and *in my opinion* don't you get, Pragerist?
I do appreciate the irony of you presenting a law which was found to be unconstitutional 30 years ago as the standard, though.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/496/310We concede that the Government has a legitimate interest in preserving the flag's function as an "incident of sovereignty," though we need not address today the extent to which this interest may justify any laws regulating conduct that would thwart this core function, as might a commercial or like appropriation of the image of the United States flag. Amicus does not, and cannot, explain how a statute that penalizes anyone who knowingly burns, mutilates, or defiles any American flag is designed to advance this asserted interest in maintaining the association between the flag and the Nation.
One really can't make this $#@! up.