The California state assembly has passed a new law that will be prohibit the selling or displaying items with an image of the Confederate flag. We have previously discussed the disciplining of students and others over the display of this flag as protected speech. In the same way, this bill raises serious constitutional questions and could trigger a court fight.
Assemblyman Isadore Hall, D-Compton secured a 72-1 vote in favor of the new law. It would not prohibit the display in educational or museum settings. However, it would prevent people from displaying the flag on state property which would presumably include parks. Hall said that he took the action after his mother saw replica Confederate money being sold at the state Capitol gift shop.
The amended bill is quite vague on key terms. It states:
SECTION 1. Section 53.5 is added to the Civil Code, to read:
53.5. (a) The State of California may not sell or display the Battle Flag of the Confederacy, also referred to as the Stars and Bars, or any similar image, or tangible personal property inscribed with such an image unless the image appears in a book that serves an educational or historical purpose.
(b) For purposes of this section, “sell” means to transfer title or possession, exchange, or barter, conditional or otherwise, in any manner or by any means whatsoever, for consideration. “Transfer possession” includes only transactions that would be found by the State Board of Equalization, for purposes of the Sales and Use Tax Law, to be in lieu of a transfer of title, exchange, or barter.
This removes problematic language in the original version but leaves a lot of questions. Here is the original language:
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Section 53.5 is added to the Civil Code, to read:
53.5. (a) A person The State of California may not sell a Confederate flag or display the Battle Flag of the Confederacy, also referred to as the Stars and Bars, or any similar image, or tangible personal property inscribed with the such an image of a Confederate flag on property owned or operated by the state unless the image appears in a book that serves an educational or historical purpose.
(b) For purposes of this section, all of the following apply:
(1)“Person” means any individual, partnership, firm, joint stock company, corporation, limited liability company, association, trust, estate, or other legal entity.
(2)“Sell” section, “sell” means to transfer title or possession, exchange, or barter, conditional or otherwise, in any manner or by any means whatsoever, for consideration. “Transfer possession” includes only transactions that would be found by the State Board of Equalization, for purposes of the Sales and Use Tax Law, to be in lieu of a transfer of title, exchange, or barter.
Hall insisted that the flag is a symbol of racism that should not be allowed to be displayed. The Southern flag is clearly insulting to many people due to its historical associations. However, it is also a simple of Southern heritage and sacrifice. Robert E. Lee himself identified with the flag while rejoicing in the end of slavery. He stated:
In this enlightened age, there are few I believe, but what will acknowledge, that slavery as an institution, is a moral & political evil in any Country.
So far from engaging in a war to perpetuate slavery, I am rejoiced that slavery is abolished. I believe it will be greatly for the interests of the South. So fully am I satisfied of this, as regards Virginia especially, that I would cheerfully have lost all I have lost by the war, and have suffered all I have suffered, to have this object attained.
Respected scholars like Civil War historian Shelby Foote have noted that the flag traditionally represented the South’s resistance to Northern political dominance. As discussing in PBS interview, he was sensitive to how many of his friends viewed it as a symbol of racism but he did not share that view. Others view it as a symbol of state’s rights or Southern culture or opposition to speech codes or politically correct sentiments. The point is that, if some flags are allowed, there are a variety of symbols that are viewed as offensive by different groups.
So the question is what happens when people want to display this symbol while others are displaying other flags viewed negatively by other groups from Free Tibet to the PLO to Israel to China. It sounds a lot like content-based censorship.
The bill was amended to exclude non-government employees and businesses from the ban to address some of these concerns. It would also not ban the display for educational or historical reasons in textbooks. To the extent that it only affects government speech, the state is on stronger ground to be sure, but I am still unclear on the wide array of displays organized by the government with citizens or groups. Even with the wise exclusions, there would appear a myriad of circumstances where state employees would be presented with a conflict in barring the display not just on a flag but in other forms containing this symbol. Those specific conflicts could present an interesting challenge to the new law.
Source: CBS
It is a curious item noticed recently that the “Stars and Bars” is in the form of a cross or more closely the roman numeral “X” which happens to be the same as the number for the US Constitutions Amendment representing states rights. The south which fought to preserve their states rights including slavery for which there is no moral high ground, did inadvertently or deliberately incorporate the “X” in their symbol. Coincidence? Maybe not.
Wrong picture is posted in this article. The ban is on the Stars and Bars only.
That was the First National Flag of the Confederate States. The ban is still the
wrong way for the Assembly to go. Amend the article and change the pictures
to the “Stars and Bars” flag which has a blue field with seven stars and three
bars, viz. Red, White, Red. The lower red bar is below the blue field.
o Looking at the way the flag has been displayed over the past centuries I understand your dislike, but here’s a bit of History that needs to be taken under these considerations
o The creation of a Confederate flag was one of the first decisions of the new country. The job of designing the flag was given to the new Committee on the Flag and Seal.
School of Thought
o The school of thought as to the design of the confederate flag was divided into two camps. One camp wanted the flag to be similar to the U.S. flag and the other desired complete differentiation. The flag similar to that of the U.S. flag won the debate.
o Battlefield Confusion
The use of the new flag caused confusion on the battlefield because it was similar to the U.S. flag. Gen. P.T. Beauregard successfully petitioned the use of a second flag in battle, thus the use of the Confederate battle flag was born.
o Misconceptions
The battle flag of the Confederacy is commonly confused with the actual flag selected and designed by the Confederate States, and it remains a controversial symbol.
o Today the Confederate Flag has been misrepresented by group that has distorted it with false propaganda, we don’t need to go into the details, but I personally hold fast to its original purpose.
o I am formal Marine, which served this great country from 1978 to 1993 and I’m an active living historian that plays a part of a black confederate soldier throughout Southern California; it’s a challenge for me because I get bombarded with questions from all sides. Not just from blacks and whites, but from all people from all cultures.
o Minds you it not a bother, I do this as a small way to correct what I’ve been taught in school and what I’ve learned in life. Not all that we learned and see is the truth. I concur with the Confederate Flag’s original intent. And I despise its definition(s) of today
o Cpl Melvin Chandler 2nd Kentucky Dismounted Calvary Bravo Company (Re-enactor)
@ Satacy this is ”AMERICA” land of free Speech WHERE YOU CAN LIVE WHERE ONE TO DO SO . If you have a problem with that then go to RUSSIA
where you don’t have Free Speech ,.
thank you: Patricia E. Gallagher
Why don’t the people who believe in this type of sad flag move their butts to the south? Why are you spreading this believe in the north? Of course certain states like the Dakotas, Idaho and Montanta are excluded but don’t come out to Cali with this freakin ass mess!
Stacy – you single out four states, not including Cali (which is not a state, but a state of mind). Would you mind explaining why you singled the other four states out?
why don’t u move to Russia or Nazi Germany
Frank
“Supak, so the war was about slavery?”
Yep.
“Lincoln stated he would not end slavery or interfere with it,”
At first he did, and that supports my case that it was ABOUT slavery, if not neccessarily to END slavery.
“there were northern slave states until after the war, hmmmm, I guess for you 1+1 does not equal 2 lol”
Yeah, real funny. The fact that there were northern slave states doesn’t change the fact that the first states to seceed did so as soon as Lincoln was elected. You do know why they did that, don’t you?
If you’d have read all my previous comments you would see that I have quoted the Cornerstone Speech. You should read it.
Nick Spinelli
“The mean streets of Cooperstown.”
Nick, insulting me personally again…
Nick, I grew up in Arkansas where I got in fights all the time because I wouldn’t pray in class, I wouldn’t listen to their music, I wouldn’t play by their rules. I then lived in Los Angeles, including some pretty bad neighborhoods when I first got started, for over 20 years.
So I suggest the next time you want to insult me based on your limited knowledge of me, you should put a sock in it.
As a previous reader noted, the Confederate Battle Flag is NOT the Stars and Bars. This latter flag was the official flag of the Confederate States of America, and historically endures in three versions. The Confederate Battle Flag,which seems to polarize Assemblyman Isadore Hall, is recognized by historians as the most enduring symbol of the American Civil War. Indeed, I employed it on my book, Valor in Gray: the Recipients of the Confederate Medal of Honor.
Mr. Hall might want to brush up on his “history” before proceeding further. Indeed, he who is unaware of his “ignorance”…will be mislead by his “knowledge.”
i think the entire CALIFORINA STATE SENATE including MR. HALL are a bunch of IDIOTS … the FIRST ADMENDMENT : states the PURSUIT OF LIFE LIBERTY and HAPPINESS as well as FREEDOM OF SPEECH . … Some people like to DIPLAY the STARS N BARS [ CONFEDERATE FLAG ] as THEIR symbol of : FREEDOM of SPEECH ! … I myself on Occasion love to Display the COFEDERATE FLAG on my TRUCK . Furthermore gentleman I don’t have a bigoted bone in my entire body . I am a M2F trans woman and very proud that i am one .
thank you: Patricia E. Gallagher
And while we’re at it… let’s ban the “rainbow flag” which is a symbol of visceral degeneracy and hatred towards Christians.
Freedom was lost when Lincoln invaded a nation, burned, raped, and pilaged its people for money…..
All I have to say is when did freedom loose it’s meaning? Freedom of speech, freedom of expression freedom of religion? What’s next banning crosses or swastikas hello there all parts of religion they were long before they were deemed racist.
Supak, so the war was about slavery? Lincoln stated he would not end slavery or interfere with it, there were northern slave states until after the war, hmmmm, I guess for you 1+1 does not equal 2 lol
I am also college educated and am not picking sides on this, but what I do know are the facts of that time period. The professor of my Civil War class directed me towards books and articles to read, he could see how interested I was in his class, the more I read the more my eyes began to open. The US and Lincoln did not give a rats ass about slavery, hence all the laws in the northern states prohibiting them from residing in several states, the war was about money and forcing the southern states back into the US, facts are facts no matter how badly you want to twist and change them.
I really admire Supak’s abilities to memorize all of his 9th grade history lessons as well as the standard narratives that serve as the dogma for modern Lincoln cultists.
In addition, he can read the minds of all southerners, living as well as those alive in the 1860s, knowing their most secret thoughts, their desires and their strategies.
Quite amazing, but nothing really special. After all, just the Jersey Shore is overflowing with these enlightened paragons of morality and northern superiority.
Killed any Native Americans lately while waving the Union flag, Supak? It should be pretty easy since youse guys rounded ’em up in open air prisons.
The mean streets of Cooperstown.
Annie:
“As for me I won’t hesitate to tell on the class bullies.”
I understand and admire your philosophy on that.
I come from a different place, more street, where you stand up to bullies.
Supak – First, I shorten your name for my convenience, not to be insulting.
Evenly matched opponents subsumes they are both having the same kind of day. If one was having a bad day, they would not, by definition, be evenly matched.
Annie sometimes sees herself as the hall monitor. She has one target she particularly likes to tell teacher about.
It is clear I am not getting through to you on the Fort Sumter problem. So let me quote from another site.
On March 5, 1861, the day after his inauguration as president of the United States, Abraham Lincoln received a message from Maj. Robert Anderson, commander of the U.S. troops holding Fort Sumter in Charleston Harbor. The message stated that there was less than a six week supply of food left in the fort.
Attempts by the Confederate government to settle its differences with the Union were spurned by Lincoln, and the Confederacy felt it could no longer tolerate the presense of a foreign force in its territory. Believing a conflict to be inevitable, Lincoln ingeniously devised a plan that would cause the Confederates to fire the first shot and thus, he hoped, inspire the states that had not yet seceded to unite in the effort to restore the Union.
On April 8, Lincoln notified Gov. Francis Pickens of South Carolina that he would attempt to resupply the fort. The Confederate commander at Charleston, Gen.P.G.T. Beauregard, was ordered by the Confederate government to demand the evacuation of the fort and if refused, to force its evacuation. On April 11, General Beauregard delivered the ultimatum to Anderson, who replied, “Gentlemen, if you do not batter the fort to pieces about us, we shall be starved out in a few days.” On direction of the Confederate government in Montgomery, Beauregard notified Anderson that if he would state the time of his evacuation, the Southern forces would hold their fire. Anderson replied that he would evacuate by noon on April 15 unless he received other instructions or additional supplies from his government. (The supply ships were expected before that time.) Told that his answer was unacceptable and that Beauregard would open fire in one hour, Anderson shook the hands of the messengers and said in parting, “If we do not meet again in this world, I hope we may meet in the better one.” At 4:30 A.M. on April 12, 1861, 43 Confederate guns in a ring around Fort Sumter began the bombardment that initiated the bloodiest war in American history.
Schulte
“Dredd – between evenly matched players, tic tac toe is always a draw.”
Nope. One of them could be having a bad day.
Between two players who play exactly the right move every time, tic tac toe is always a draw.
In Hot Springs Arkansas we had the IQ Zoo where a Chicken could play anyone to a draw, and often beat some children.
Schulte:
“Supak – I think you are getting a little testy.”
You really shouldn’t posit the unprovable. I played championship poker, won a lot of money at Intrade, and have two very independently minded children and an Italian wife.
Trust me. I am not testy right now.
But I would qualify that as a personal attack and if I was the type to run and tell the nearest teacher, your comment would be deleted for violating the civility policy.
“Serenity”
SO, for you, there is only testy and serene?
” Blogs are not a good forum for subtle humor, btw.”
Maybe not for you.
“Yeppers, I am standing behind what I said about SC and Fort Sumter.”
So Cuba would be justified in attacking Gitmo?
“analogous is a big word, somewhat is not. That is subtle humor.”
Not really subtle.
Somewhat leaves a big range of uncertainty plotted on the curve.
Analagous means a very specific thing, namely, that the comparison sheds some light on the subject.
If the Falklands were like Ft Sumter, then the North would have invaded the fort and would have taken the land from SC, who you claim was the rightful owner, just as Argentina had invaded the Falklands to take them from the British.
Since the North did not “invade” Fort Sumter, WHICH THEY OWNED, the situation is NOT analogous.
Begging your pardon,
The King was royal ‘children’?
Charles was an adult when cavorting with the married Camilla.
And I believe your statement said ‘the royals’ could not be criticized.
Perhaps I misunderstood.
Sorry.