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)

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)

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)

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)

"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)

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)

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)

"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)

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)

"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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)