In this country, a presidential executive order cannot override a Supreme Court ruling. On flag burning, Trump doesn't appear to care.
https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/problems-trumps-radical-new-executive-order-flag-burning-rcna227025
A few weeks after winning the 2016 presidential election, Donald Trump said he was prepared to take American citizenship away from those who burn the American flag, insisting there had to be meaningful “consequences” for such protests, even if the U.S. Supreme Court has already ruled that this is protected speech under the First Amendment.....
In his second term, however, he has apparently decided to take action — or something resembling action. NBC News reported:
Trump signed [an] executive order on Monday aimed at prosecuting people who ‘desecrate’ the American flag, a third fact sheet said. That order, first reported by Fox News, directs Bondi to ‘vigorously prosecute those who violate our laws in ways that involve desecrating the flag, and to pursue litigation to clarify the scope of First Amendment in this area.’
“What the penalty is going to be, if you burn a flag, you get one year in jail — no early exits, no nothing,” the president said, adding:
“You will see flag burning stop immediately.”
Trump signs an executive order: "If you burn a flag, you get one year in jail."
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar.com) 2025-08-25T15:11:52.954Z
......
In this country, whether Trump likes it or not, a presidential executive order cannot override a Supreme Court ruling. In this country, whether Trump likes it or not, a president cannot create new criminal statutes — measures that would literally imprison Americans — without Congress.
As The New York Times’ Jamelle Bouie wrote in response to the Republican’s new order, “
He literally thinks he is a king. ... This entire media blitz for when he signs executive orders is meant to create the impression that they are royal decrees.”
To the extent that the administration tries to implement this policy, litigation would be inevitable. Whether Trump assumes that the far-right high court would rule differently on the underlying issue than it did 35 years ago is unclear. Watch this space.
= new reply since forum marked as read