• Is flying a flag forced speech ?

    From Jethro_uk@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jul 9 13:56:46 2023
    And does the recent SCOTUS reframing of the 1st amendment have any
    bearing here ?


    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12279413/North-Carolina- developer-selling-parcels-land-patriots-require-fly-American-flag.html

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Barry Gold@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jul 9 15:44:29 2023
    On 7/9/2023 1:56 PM, Jethro_uk wrote:
    And does the recent SCOTUS reframing of the 1st amendment have any
    bearing here ?


    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12279413/North-Carolina- developer-selling-parcels-land-patriots-require-fly-American-flag.html

    The 1st Amendment would "have bearing" here if it were a government
    requiring people to fly the flag.

    But this is a private person (or corporation - "legal person") placing a
    deed restriction on property. I see no conflict with the constitution,
    any more than if I were to write a contract promising to pay somebody
    $10,000 per year if they would fly the US flag -- or the pride flag, or
    the Union Jack, or...

    And, btw, I don't think that SCOTUS "reframed" the 1st Amendment.
    "Compelled speech" has been held unconstitutional since at least 1943
    (West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, re: the saluting
    the US flag)

    There are certain exceptions, mostly dealing with "commercial speech",
    e.g., the Surgeon General's warnings on alcohol and tobacco products.

    See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compelled_speech

    --
    I do so have a memory. It's backed up on DVD... somewhere...

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Stuart O. Bronstein@21:1/5 to jethro_uk@hotmailbin.com on Sun Jul 9 22:17:06 2023
    Jethro_uk <jethro_uk@hotmailbin.com> wrote:

    And does the recent SCOTUS reframing of the 1st amendment have any
    bearing here ?

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12279413/North-Carolina- developer-selling-parcels-land-patriots-require-fly-American-flag.html

    It is likely enforceable against the first purchasers of the properties involved, as a contractual obligation. It may not be enforceable against subsequent purchasers, because this kind of thing may not "run with the
    land."


    --
    Stu
    http://DownToEarthLawyer.com

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From micky@21:1/5 to jethro_uk@hotmailbin.com on Sun Jul 9 22:17:56 2023
    In misc.legal.moderated, on Sun, 9 Jul 2023 13:56:46 -0700 (PDT),
    Jethro_uk <jethro_uk@hotmailbin.com> wrote:

    And does the recent SCOTUS reframing of the 1st amendment have any
    bearing here ?


    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12279413/North-Carolina- >developer-selling-parcels-land-patriots-require-fly-American-flag.html

    I wonder if they have to fly it right-side up. Don't contact them to
    ask, in the unlikely? event they haven't thought to prohibit that.

    --
    I think you can tell, but just to be sure:
    I am not a lawyer.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jul 9 22:17:27 2023
    "Jethro_uk" wrote in message news:u8etea$1m95n$12@dont-email.me...

    And does the recent SCOTUS reframing of the 1st amendment have any
    bearing here ?


    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12279413/North-Carolina- >developer-selling-parcels-land-patriots-require-fly-American-flag.html

    No, because no one is forced to buy property in the community. This is apparently a planned master community with a patriotic theme, and the requirement to have a flag is no different conceptually from communities
    where roofs have to be a certain style or paint colors are limited to
    certain choices or only certain types of fences are allowed. This would
    all be spelled out in the community documents which the buyer would have to agree to before the house purchase would be approved.

    --

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Roy@21:1/5 to Rick on Mon Jul 10 09:02:07 2023
    On 7/10/2023 8:44 AM, Rick wrote:
    "micky"  wrote in message
    news:2ksmaidug6cj7akeh4ahp4qqisir4grsdl@4ax.com...

    In misc.legal.moderated, on Sun, 9 Jul 2023 13:56:46 -0700 (PDT),
    Jethro_uk <jethro_uk@hotmailbin.com> wrote:

    And does the recent SCOTUS reframing of the 1st amendment have any
    bearing here ?


    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12279413/North-Carolina-
    developer-selling-parcels-land-patriots-require-fly-American-flag.html

    I wonder if they have to fly it right-side up.  Don't contact them to
    ask, in the unlikely? event they haven't thought to prohibit that.


    At that point, you would likely bump into federal laws governing how the
    flag can be displayed.  My guess is the documents probably contain
    language stating the flag has to be displayed in a manner consistent
    with federal law.

    --

    I would think that the developer also has created an HOA which will have
    rules controlling the flag display

    From the VFW website https://www.vfw.org/Flag/

    Public Law 94-344, known as the Federal Flag Code, contains rules for
    handling and displaying the U.S. flag. While the federal code contains
    no penalties for misusing the flag, states have their own flag codes and
    may impose penalties. The language of the federal code makes clear that
    the flag is a living symbol.

    Per Federal Flag Code, Section 2, paragraph (a), it is the universal
    custom to display the flag only from sunrise to sunset on buildings and
    on stationary flagstaffs in the open. However, when a patriotic effect
    is desired, the flag may be displayed twenty-four hours a day if
    properly illuminated during the hours of darkness.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From John Levine@21:1/5 to All on Mon Jul 10 08:43:29 2023
    According to micky <misc07@fmguy.com>: >>https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12279413/North-Carolina- >>developer-selling-parcels-land-patriots-require-fly-American-flag.html

    I wonder if they have to fly it right-side up. Don't contact them to
    ask, in the unlikely? event they haven't thought to prohibit that.

    Or fly other flags. I figure alongside I'd fly a Confederate flag, a
    Pride flag, and a Mexican flag.

    --
    Regards,
    John Levine, johnl@taugh.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
    Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick@21:1/5 to micky on Mon Jul 10 08:44:50 2023
    "micky" wrote in message news:2ksmaidug6cj7akeh4ahp4qqisir4grsdl@4ax.com...

    In misc.legal.moderated, on Sun, 9 Jul 2023 13:56:46 -0700 (PDT),
    Jethro_uk <jethro_uk@hotmailbin.com> wrote:

    And does the recent SCOTUS reframing of the 1st amendment have any
    bearing here ?


    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12279413/North-Carolina- >>developer-selling-parcels-land-patriots-require-fly-American-flag.html

    I wonder if they have to fly it right-side up. Don't contact them to
    ask, in the unlikely? event they haven't thought to prohibit that.


    At that point, you would likely bump into federal laws governing how the
    flag can be displayed. My guess is the documents probably contain language stating the flag has to be displayed in a manner consistent with federal
    law.

    --

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From micky@21:1/5 to montanawolf@outlook.com on Mon Jul 10 19:54:30 2023
    In misc.legal.moderated, on Mon, 10 Jul 2023 09:02:07 -0700 (PDT), Roy <montanawolf@outlook.com> wrote:

    On 7/10/2023 8:44 AM, Rick wrote:
    "micky" wrote in message
    news:2ksmaidug6cj7akeh4ahp4qqisir4grsdl@4ax.com...

    In misc.legal.moderated, on Sun, 9 Jul 2023 13:56:46 -0700 (PDT),
    Jethro_uk <jethro_uk@hotmailbin.com> wrote:

    And does the recent SCOTUS reframing of the 1st amendment have any
    bearing here ?


    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12279413/North-Carolina-
    developer-selling-parcels-land-patriots-require-fly-American-flag.html

    I wonder if they have to fly it right-side up. Don't contact them to
    ask, in the unlikely? event they haven't thought to prohibit that.


    At that point, you would likely bump into federal laws governing how the
    flag can be displayed. My guess is the documents probably contain
    language stating the flag has to be displayed in a manner consistent
    with federal law.

    --

    I would think that the developer also has created an HOA which will have >rules controlling the flag display

    From the VFW website https://www.vfw.org/Flag/

    Public Law 94-344, known as the Federal Flag Code, contains rules for >handling and displaying the U.S. flag. While the federal code contains
    no penalties for misusing the flag, states have their own flag codes and
    may impose penalties.

    I can well imagine that they would try, but I don't see how they can
    legally impose penalties.

    The language of the federal code makes clear that
    the flag is a living symbol.

    Being a living symbol doesn't mean the government can make binding rules
    about how a flag is flown. And certainly not prohibiting its being
    flown upside down which is protected as free speech.

    The sellers of the property could, but maybe they didn't**.

    Per Federal Flag Code, Section 2, paragraph (a), it is the universal
    custom

    Yes, custom.

    to display the flag only from sunrise to sunset on buildings and
    on stationary flagstaffs in the open. However, when a patriotic effect
    is desired, the flag may be displayed twenty-four hours a day if
    properly illuminated during the hours of darkness.

    And if that were part of the n'hood rules, will this new neighborhood
    enforce this? For an office or a business, it's part of the job for
    someone to put the flag up and down each day, but for a homeowner, it's
    like having another dog. Unless it's properly lit and you don't have
    to put it up or down, but I've never seen a residential flagpole that
    was properly lit.

    **I can easily imagine a neighbor N taking down M's flag that was flying
    upside down, and if M keeps putting it up again, then N shooting him.

    --
    I think you can tell, but just to be sure:
    I am not a lawyer.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick@21:1/5 to micky on Mon Jul 10 22:32:49 2023
    "micky" wrote in message news:9gloaihktmirmd6bvs7570vrf2k6d5ofb8@4ax.com...

    In misc.legal.moderated, on Mon, 10 Jul 2023 09:02:07 -0700 (PDT), Roy ><montanawolf@outlook.com> wrote:

    On 7/10/2023 8:44 AM, Rick wrote:
    "micky" wrote in message
    news:2ksmaidug6cj7akeh4ahp4qqisir4grsdl@4ax.com...

    In misc.legal.moderated, on Sun, 9 Jul 2023 13:56:46 -0700 (PDT),
    Jethro_uk <jethro_uk@hotmailbin.com> wrote:

    And does the recent SCOTUS reframing of the 1st amendment have any
    bearing here ?


    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12279413/North-Carolina-
    developer-selling-parcels-land-patriots-require-fly-American-flag.html >>>>
    I wonder if they have to fly it right-side up. Don't contact them to
    ask, in the unlikely? event they haven't thought to prohibit that.


    At that point, you would likely bump into federal laws governing how the >>> flag can be displayed. My guess is the documents probably contain
    language stating the flag has to be displayed in a manner consistent
    with federal law.

    --

    I would think that the developer also has created an HOA which will have >>rules controlling the flag display

    From the VFW website https://www.vfw.org/Flag/

    Public Law 94-344, known as the Federal Flag Code, contains rules for >>handling and displaying the U.S. flag. While the federal code contains
    no penalties for misusing the flag, states have their own flag codes and >>may impose penalties.

    I can well imagine that they would try, but I don't see how they can
    legally impose penalties.

    The language of the federal code makes clear that
    the flag is a living symbol.

    Being a living symbol doesn't mean the government can make binding rules >about how a flag is flown. And certainly not prohibiting its being
    flown upside down which is protected as free speech.


    Yes, free speech is a right, including the right to either display or not display the flag, as you see fit, but there is nothing to prevent you from signing that right away in specific situations. When you buy a house in
    this particular community, you are signing a contract that states you will abide by the Association rules, one of which is that you display the flag, probably with a requirement that you abide by federal regulations regarding same. If you choose to not do this, then you are in violation of the
    contract you signed in buying the house, and the Association would have the legal right and means to take legal action against you to enforce the
    contract.

    Bottom line is that if you don't like the Association rules about the flag, don't buy a house there.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Roy@21:1/5 to micky on Mon Jul 10 23:01:26 2023
    On 7/10/2023 7:54 PM, micky wrote:
    ...

    And if that were part of the n'hood rules, will this new neighborhood
    enforce this? For an office or a business, it's part of the job for
    someone to put the flag up and down each day, but for a homeowner, it's
    like having another dog. Unless it's properly lit and you don't have
    to put it up or down, but I've never seen a residential flagpole that
    was properly lit.
    ...


    I have seen them and Amazon sells a number of solar flag pole lights.

    Also see

    https://www.united-states-flag.com/flagpole-light.html

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Jethro_uk@21:1/5 to All on Tue Jul 11 07:01:22 2023
    On Sun, 09 Jul 2023 13:56:46 -0700, Jethro_uk wrote:

    And does the recent SCOTUS reframing of the 1st amendment have any
    bearing here ?


    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12279413/North-Carolina- developer-selling-parcels-land-patriots-require-fly-American-flag.html

    This case reminds me of P J O'Rourkes masterful depiction of SCOTUS at
    work in "Parliament of Whores" where the Supremes wrangle with a thorny
    issue about flag burning being banned in national parks. I can't
    recommend it enough to readers here :)

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Barry Gold@21:1/5 to Rick on Tue Jul 11 06:59:56 2023
    On 7/10/2023 8:44 AM, Rick wrote:
    "micky"  wrote in message
    news:2ksmaidug6cj7akeh4ahp4qqisir4grsdl@4ax.com...

    In misc.legal.moderated, on Sun, 9 Jul 2023 13:56:46 -0700 (PDT),
    Jethro_uk <jethro_uk@hotmailbin.com> wrote:

    And does the recent SCOTUS reframing of the 1st amendment have any
    bearing here ?


    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12279413/North-Carolina-
    developer-selling-parcels-land-patriots-require-fly-American-flag.html

    I wonder if they have to fly it right-side up.  Don't contact them to
    ask, in the unlikely? event they haven't thought to prohibit that.


    At that point, you would likely bump into federal laws governing how the
    flag can be displayed.  My guess is the documents probably contain
    language stating the flag has to be displayed in a manner consistent
    with federal law.

    The flag code no longer has the power of law. But I expect you could incorporate it by reference in the deed.

    --
    I do so have a memory. It's backed up on DVD... somewhere...

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Barry Gold@21:1/5 to Stuart O. Bronstein on Tue Jul 11 06:59:30 2023
    On 7/9/2023 10:17 PM, Stuart O. Bronstein wrote:
    Jethro_uk<jethro_uk@hotmailbin.com> wrote:

    And does the recent SCOTUS reframing of the 1st amendment have any
    bearing here ?

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12279413/North-Carolina-
    developer-selling-parcels-land-patriots-require-fly-American-flag.html
    It is likely enforceable against the first purchasers of the properties involved, as a contractual obligation. It may not be enforceable against subsequent purchasers, because this kind of thing may not "run with the land."

    Why not? If the developer puts it into the land deed, I would think it
    would "run with the land" just like any other deed restriction.

    --
    I do so have a memory. It's backed up on DVD... somewhere...

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Stuart O. Bronstein@21:1/5 to Barry Gold on Tue Jul 11 07:52:01 2023
    Barry Gold <bgold@labcats.org> wrote:
    Stuart O. Bronstein wrote:
    Jethro_uk<jethro_uk@hotmailbin.com> wrote:

    And does the recent SCOTUS reframing of the 1st amendment have any
    bearing here ?

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12279413/North-Carolina-
    developer-selling-parcels-land-patriots-require-fly-American-flag.htm
    l
    It is likely enforceable against the first purchasers of the
    properties involved, as a contractual obligation. It may not be
    enforceable against subsequent purchasers, because this kind of thing
    may not "run with the land."

    Why not? If the developer puts it into the land deed, I would think it
    would "run with the land" just like any other deed restriction.

    The point is that ALL covenants don't run with the land. One of the requirements is "horizontal privity." This refers to a special
    relationship that must exist between the original promisor and the
    promisee. The nature of the relationship that must be shown varies from
    state to state but usually involves showing that both have a mutual
    interest in the land.

    After the developer sells off all parcels, he no longer has any legal
    interest in the property. So there is no horizontal privity. If it's
    set up so that it's mutually enforceable by other owners, then it would
    run with the land.


    --
    Stu
    http://DownToEarthLawyer.com

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Barry Gold@21:1/5 to Stuart O. Bronstein on Tue Jul 11 09:33:47 2023
    On 7/11/2023 7:52 AM, Stuart O. Bronstein wrote:
    After the developer sells off all parcels, he no longer has any legal interest in the property. So there is no horizontal privity. If it's
    set up so that it's mutually enforceable by other owners, then it would
    run with the land.

    Okay, that makes sense. Thank you.
    --
    I do so have a memory. It's backed up on DVD... somewhere...

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Barry Gold@21:1/5 to John Levine on Tue Jul 11 11:40:52 2023
    On 7/10/2023 8:43 AM, John Levine wrote:
    According to micky<misc07@fmguy.com>:
    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12279413/North-Carolina-
    developer-selling-parcels-land-patriots-require-fly-American-flag.html
    I wonder if they have to fly it right-side up. Don't contact them to
    ask, in the unlikely? event they haven't thought to prohibit that.
    Or fly other flags. I figure alongside I'd fly a Confederate flag, a
    Pride flag, and a Mexican flag.

    Maybe Israeli and Iranian flags. And the UN flag?

    --
    I do so have a memory. It's backed up on DVD... somewhere...

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From micky@21:1/5 to montanawolf@outlook.com on Tue Jul 11 22:27:52 2023
    In misc.legal.moderated, on Mon, 10 Jul 2023 23:01:26 -0700 (PDT), Roy <montanawolf@outlook.com> wrote:

    On 7/10/2023 7:54 PM, micky wrote:
    ...

    And if that were part of the n'hood rules, will this new neighborhood
    enforce this? For an office or a business, it's part of the job for
    someone to put the flag up and down each day, but for a homeowner, it's
    like having another dog. Unless it's properly lit and you don't have
    to put it up or down, but I've never seen a residential flagpole that
    was properly lit.
    ...


    I have seen them and Amazon sells a number of solar flag pole lights.

    Also see

    https://www.united-states-flag.com/flagpole-light.html

    Amazing. I guess I'll have to get out more at night. (Although the
    ones with only one light don't seem adquate to me if the wind ever blows
    away from or even towards the light.)

    --
    I think you can tell, but just to be sure:
    I am not a lawyer.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)