Which statement best identifies how the decision in the United States v. Eichmann case was a result of constitutional interpretation?(1 point)

Question

Responses

The Supreme Court reconsidered the language of the Fourteenth Amendment.
The Supreme Court reconsidered the language of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Flag burning is not explicitly stated under the First Amendment but was interpreted to be a form of expression in the U.S. v. Eichmann case.
Flag burning is not explicitly stated under the First Amendment but was interpreted to be a form of expression in the U.S. v. Eichmann case.

The Supreme Court followed the Constitution exactly and no interpretations were made in this case.
The Supreme Court followed the Constitution exactly and no interpretations were made in this case.

The Supreme Court used the Flag Protection Act to make a decision.

Answer 1

The statement that best identifies how the decision in the United States v. Eichmann case was a result of constitutional interpretation is:

"Flag burning is not explicitly stated under the First Amendment but was interpreted to be a form of expression in the U.S. v. Eichmann case."

This reflects the Court's interpretation of the First Amendment as it relates to symbolic speech and expressive conduct.