PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jun 14, 2012
Flag Protection Act of 2012 - Replaces provisions regarding desecration of the flag of the United States with provisions that subject any person who: (1) destroys or damages a U.S. flag with the primary purpose and intent to incite or produce imminent violence or a breach of the peace to a fine of up to $100,000, imprisonment for up to 1 year, or both; (2) intentionally threatens or intimidates any person or group of persons by burning a U.S. flag to a fine of up to $100,000, imprisonment for up to 1 year, or both; (3) steals or knowingly converts to his or her use, or the use of another, a U.S. flag belonging to the United States and intentionally destroys or damages that flag to a fine of up to $250,000, imprisonment for up to 2 years, or both; and (4) steals or knowingly converts to his or her use, or the use of another, a U.S. flag belonging to the United States and intentionally destroys or damags that flag within any lands reserved for the use of, or under the exclusive or concurrent jurisdiction of, the United States to a fine of up to $250,000, imprisonment for up to 2 years, or both.
People & committees
Sen. Tester, Jon [D-MT] · D–MT
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 10, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze S.3296 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine S.3296 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine S.3296 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine S.3296 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.