Feds move to dismiss charges against Army veteran who burned American flag near White House

Audio By Carbonatix

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Justice Department has moved to dismiss charges against an Army veteran who set fire to an American flag near the White House last year to protest President Donald Trump’s executive order on flag burning.

Jay Carey, 55, of Arden, North Carolina, who has said he served in the Army from 1989 to 2012 and was deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan, was arrested on Aug. 25 after he set fire to a flag in Lafayette Park, which the National Park Service oversees. Earlier that day, Trump signed an executive order requiring the Justice Department to investigate and prosecute people for burning the American flag.

Carey was charged with two misdemeanors that aren’t focused on the act of burning a flag: igniting a fire in an undesignated area and lighting a fire causing damage to property or park resources. He pleaded not guilty in September. Friday's filing did not explain the decision to move to dismiss and the U.S Attorney’s office for the District of Columbia did not immediately respond on Saturday to an email seeking comment.

The Supreme Court has ruled that flag burning is a legitimate political expression protected by the Constitution. Trump’s order asserted that burning a flag can be prosecuted if it “is likely to incite imminent lawless action” or amounts to “fighting words.”

“I set out to demonstrate that the First Amendment is sacred and that no administration has the right to supersede our constitutional rights,” Carey said in a statement from the Partnership for Civil Justice Fund. "I was targeted for federal prosecution because of that. I am glad to stand with all those who are fighting for our fundamental rights and hope that this victory can help the next person who takes a stand.”

It shows people that “the Constitution still matters,” Carey said when reached by telephone on Saturday.

Mara Verheyden-Hilliard, one of Carey’s lawyers and fund co-founder, said the prosecution shouldn’t have been brought.

“The government’s attempt to criminally punish a protestor based on expressive conduct targeted for prosecution by presidential order posed a grave threat to First Amendment freedoms,” Verheyden-Hilliard said in a statement. “The government’s about-face is a critical vindication of those rights. This case also lays the groundwork for defending those across the country who are targeted for vindictive prosecution by the Trump Administration in an effort to silence and punish viewpoints it doesn’t like.”