Critics of federal court rulings mandating that burning Old Glory is a form of protected political speech occasionally lapse into a tired argument to make their case.

It is that the Constitution doesn’t spell out that burning the Stars and Stripes falls into that category of protected civil liberty. They’re right. The Constitution doesn’t say any particular form of protest is protected by the First Amendment.

The argument reminds me of a constant argument I had with a colleague in Amarillo, who argued that the Constitution doesn’t say a word about the “separation of church and state,” so therefore, there is no separation. I told my colleague that the separation clearly is implied in the first clause of the First Amendment when it declares that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion … “

The Constitution doesn’t single out flag burning. Or draft-card burning. Or marching in the streets carrying signs that refer to police officers as ugly farm animals.

The founders, all those wise men, knew enough to grant interpretive power in our court system. They decided the courts should be the final arbiter on what’s constitutional and what isn’t.

The Supreme Court has ruled already that flag burning is protected speech. It has issued rulings repeatedly since the founding of our republic. Donald Trump says flag burning should result in a year in jail for the numbskull who does it. No, Donald. You can’t go there.

The nation’s founders had this one right. The current president of the United States has it wrong.