As I knew would happen, the man from Urbana, Illinois who was arrested “for his own safety” by local police will not be charged. The prosecutor knows damn well that it would be a complete waste of time to charge and try to convict him under a law declared unconstitutional almost three decades ago.





Champaign County State’s Attorney Julia Rietz said today that the man arrested on July 4 after a flag-burning Facebook post will not be charged. “The State’s Attorney’s Office is declining to file charges against (Bryton) Mellott as the act of burning a flag is protected free speech according to the US Supreme Court decision, Texas v. Johnson, 491 US 397 (1989),” Rietz said in a statement. “We have considered 720 ILCS 5/49-1, Flag Desecration, an Illinois statute currently in effect,” the statement reads. “This statute was the basis for the decision by Urbana Police officers to arrest Mellott. While that statute remains in effect, it is contradictory to the US Supreme Court ruling in Texas v. Johnson. We will be discussing this issue with our local legislators and asking that they consider reviewing this statute given the constitutional issues it presents.”

No, the statute is not “in effect” when it’s been declared unconstitutional. It may not actually be removed from the books yet, but it is totally unenforceable. The police say they still acted in good faith:

“Laws dealing with questions of Constitutional rights are extremely complex,” the release said. “The Urbana Police Department recognizes that this is a case where the right of free speech may have been in conflict with the safety of innocent and uninvolved citizens. Our officers strive every day to achieve a balance between public safety and preservation of Constitutional rights. In this circumstance, our officers acted in good faith and in reliance on a state law that was passed by our legislature in an attempt to do just that. We respect the analysis of the State’s Attorney’s Office and their determination not to proceed with the prosecution in this matter.”

There is nothing “extremely complex” about this situation. You violated the rights of a man who did not break the law in any conceivable or hypothetical way. And this is not a close call. It’s not a judgment call. What you did was obviously unjust and unconstitutional, enough that it should overcome qualified immunity and make you personally liable for your actions. The only people who violated the law in this situation were those who threatened this man and the police. Period.