These clearly can't both be true... ?
At any rate, for those who wish for this action to be legal, do you feel the same way about the flags of other countries? Why or why not?
I don't see anyone claiming that the law already provides for this punishment, every post on the existing law says this conflicts with it, explicitly or, in one case, implicitly. Are you perhaps misreading the “settled case law” post which does rely on the reader knowing the existing case law?
> These clearly can't both be true... ?
It is in conflict with existing Constitutional case law, but those claiming it is a nullity with no significance for that reason are nonetheless incorrect both because quite a lot of damage can be done before courts act and because there is no guarantee of how the current Supreme Court will act just because the existing case law is clear.
And, frankly, because the present administration, when it wants to punish without legal basis, doesn't just fold when the courts strike down what it is doing, but shifts theoretical basis and continues applying punishment.
Apparently.
Do I need to be respectful of enemy's flag?
I'm not usually the kind of person to speculate about hidden motives like this. Frankly I think this kind of move is usually too uncertain to make sense. It could always just be one of his frequent semi-random actions like renaming the Gulf of Mexico. If I assume it's a considered action, though, I can't come up with another explanation for it.