It would seem that involuntary affirmation could be commanded only on even more immediate and urgent grounds than silence." West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624, 633 (1943). . Analysis: The Court determined that the case raised a substantial federal question because the Gobitis decision was determined on the grounds of religious freedom, while this case was challenged under the freedom of speech provisions of the First Amendment. The Court differentiated this case from Hamilton v. Regents, 293 U.S. 245 (1934), which permitted states to require military training as part of college enrollment, because college enrollment was not compulsory. The Court determined that saluting a flag was symbolic speech, which could not be compelled absent an imminent threat of some type of serious harm, if it could be compelled at all. More significantly, the Court did not see this dispute as a religious issue. The Court acknowledged that the students in this particular case were...

However, the Court also recognized that people could have equally-valid non-religious reasons to object to the forced salute. Because the Court found that the Board did not have the power to make the salute a legal duty, it did not have to determine whether a non-religious objection would merit the same protection as a religious objection. Instead, the Court resolved this case by looking at the First Amendment's guarantees of freedom of speech and how that related to freedom from compulsory speech.
Conclusion: The Court overruled West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, and determined that the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment protected students from being forced to salute the American flag or being forced to say the Pledge of Allegiance.

References

Hamilton v. Regents, 293 U.S. 245 (1934).

Minersville School District v. Gobitis, 310 U.S. 586 (1940).

Stromberg v.…