Document: 396 U.S. 371 90 S.Ct. 613 24 L.Ed.2d 590 Alfred Tennyson COWGILL, appellant,v.CALIFORNIA. No. 496. Supreme Court of the United States January 19, 1970 Melville B. Nimmer and Laurence R. Sperber, for appellant. Thomas C. Lynch, Atty. Gen. California, William E. James, Asst. Gen., Evelle J. Younger, appellee. PER CURIAM. 1 The motion to dismiss is granted appeal dismissed. 2 Mr. Justice HARLAN, with whom BRENNAN joins, concurring. 3 While I am view this should be dismissed, deem it appropriate explain basis my conclusion since issue tendered by appellant—whether symbolic expression displaying a 'mutilated' American flag protected from punishment Fourteenth Amendment—is one that cannot regard as insubstantial. See Street v. New York, 394 576, 594, 89 1354, 22 572 (1969). 4 record before us not in judgment suitable considering broad question does adequately flush narrower predicate whether there recognizable communicative aspect appellant's conduct which appears have consisted merely wearing vest fashioned out cutup flag. Such question, insubstantial itself, has been pretermitted Court's previous socalled 'symbolic speech' cases where content was beyond dispute. Tinker Des Moines School District, 393 503, 733, 21 731 (1969); Gregory City Chicago, 111, 946, 134 Brown Louisiana, 383 131, 86 719, 15 637 (1966); Bell Maryland, 378 226, 84 1814, 12 822 (1964); Garner 368 157, 201, 82 248, 7 207 (concurring judgment) (1961); West Virginia State Board Education Barnette, 319 624, 632, 63 1178, 87 L.Ed. 1628 (1943); see generally Note, Symbolic Conduct, 68 Col.L.Rev. 1091 (1968). has, yet, established test determining at what point becomes so intertwined necessary weigh State's interest proscribing against constitutionally freedom expression.* 5 appellant contends his conveyed message, stipulated statement facts on case comes suggests not, first instance, determined factual matter trial court. Further, no indication either presented evidence or urged any standard issue. would therefore based inadequacy deciding presented. Rescue Army Municipal Court, 331 549, 67 1409, 91 1666; DeBacker Brainerd, 163. 6 DOUGLAS opinion probable jurisdiction noted. * Chief Warren, writing majority O'Brien, 391 367, 376, 88 1673, 20 672 (1968), said: 'We accept an apparently limitness variety can labeled 'speech' whenever person engaging intends thereby express idea.' went on, however, take judicial notice significance draft-card burning had become recognized way protesting draft involvement Vietnam.

Category: 2