Object

Flag‑Burning Constitutional Amendment (Proposed)

A proposed constitutional amendment banning flag desecration, represented across multiple related scenes in The West Wing (notably S1E16) as a policy/briefing text rather than a physical prop. Functions as a mobilizing policy packet and rhetorical lever—referenced in motorcade/briefing contexts and used to shape meeting strategy and political optics.

5 appearances

Appearances in the Narrative

When this object appears and how it's used

5 moments

S1E16 · 20 Hours in L.A.

Bartlet Deflects the Flag-Burning Outcry

The proposed flag‑burning constitutional amendment is invoked verbally as the policy object around which moral appeals coalesce. It functions as the concrete demand that translates rhetorical outrage into a legislative ask, catalyzing applause and prompting Bartlet's dismissive framing of the debate as ongoing and diffused.

Before: A circulating proposal referenced in briefings and public discourse, positioned as a potential legal remedy for flag desecration.

After: Remains an item of public pressure and debate; its advocacy is publicly registered but not advanced by the President in this moment.

View full event

S1E16 · 20 Hours in L.A.

Guacamole, Guard Detail and a Flag Joke

The proposed flag‑burning amendment functions as the fulcrum of Al Kiefer’s pitch — invoked, not displayed. It transforms Bartlet’s loose joke into a concrete political ask and reframes a family meal into a strategic debate about votes and principle.

Before: An abstract policy topic circulating among staff and consultants, discussed in prior briefings but not decided.

After: Becomes an immediately actionable political problem on staff radar, flagged for further debate and decision.

View full event

S1E16 · 20 Hours in L.A.

Kiefer's Numbers-Driven Sell: Burn the Flag, Save the White House

The proposed flag‑burning constitutional amendment is the argumentative fulcrum of Kiefer's pitch: referenced repeatedly as an unstoppable political force that frames the moral and tactical choice facing the President and staff.

Before: A circulating legislative/political issue that has passed the House and is active in national debate.

After: Remains an unresolved, politically charged proposal; the lunch ends without a presidential stance being declared.

View full event

S1E16 · 20 Hours in L.A.

From Banter to Ballot: C.J. Reorients the Room

The proposed flag‑burning constitutional amendment functions as the central policy object around which the patio conversation crystallizes. It is invoked verbally as the issue Kiefer claims will win votes; Joey dismantles that claim with granular polling numbers, transforming the amendment from an electoral fix into a rhetorical trap.

Before: A live policy proposal circulating in briefings and donor conversations, treated by some (Kiefer, donors) as a potential vote‑winning wedge.

After: Reframed publicly in this conversation as politically overstated — the amendment remains on the table but is demoted tactically because voters rate it low in salience and vote‑deciding power.

View full event

S1E16 · 20 Hours in L.A.

Flag-Poll Reality Check and a Quiet Personal Loss

The proposed flag‑burning constitutional amendment functions as the disputed policy object around which the patio debate orbits; Joey references California polling to show the amendment is low‑priority to voters and therefore a risky presidential move.

Before: Active as the focal piece of Kiefer's scare‑poll and donor pitch; being discussed as a potential presidential positioning tool.

After: Recast as a marginal issue in California polling, downgraded from electoral opportunity to tactical liability in the minds of staff present.

View full event