1. The Establishment Clause is described to be a fundamental component of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The purpose that this clause serves is to protect the potential establishment of a new religion by the government or if they will start showing bias towards a specific religion. It epitomizes the principles of separation of church and state, ensuring that the people residing in the country are able to practice whichever religion that they so choose without government influence. 

As a way to understand The Establishment Clause, the Supreme Court introduced the creation of The Lemon Test in the case Lemon V. Kurtzman in 1971. Within this test, there are 3 separate parts that help decide if a government official action or law will break the Establishment Clause. The first part of this test shows that there must be a neutral purpose, meaning, it needs to have a legitimate purpose that is not related to religion. The second requirement that it needs to meet is if it advances or constrains religion displaying if the action has any religious bias. The last requirement that is apart of the Lemon Test is through Excessive Entanglement. This requirement means that this should not lead to greater involvement with religion through any means. This involvement can include interactions between government institutions and any religious organizations. If any of these criteria aren’t met, it would be perceived as unconstitutional based on the Establishment Clause. Using the Lemon Test has allowed for greater ability to evaluate differing policies and educational practices involving religion. It helps to guide the government down a more neutral path without favoring any religion. 

2. The burning of the U.S. flag is protected by the first amendment due to it being an attack of symbolic speech. This protection of the U.S. flag was incorporated during the Supreme Court Case of Texas V. Johnson in 1989. The case consisted of Gregory Lee Johnson using the burning of the American flag as a demonstration to display the displeasure he felt towards the policies of the Reagan Administration. He was later arrested for this action under a texas law involving the desecration of the flag. After being arrested, he later appealed his conviction and the Supreme Court had ruled his decision of burning the U.S. flag to 5-4. The reasoning behind this choice was because it was seen as a form of expression rather than blatant hatred towards the country. The court had also pointed out that the first amendment had protected nonverbal actions to convey a specific message as well. It was explained that the government is not able to hinder their ability of speech because their opinions were unfavorable. By allowing that reasoning to bypass that kind of speech, it would end up going against the principles that the first amendment stands for. 

3. If someone says that they are “taking the fifth,” it means that they are calling upon their fifth amendment right to protect themselves from self-incrimination. The creation of the fifth amendment was to help individuals avoid the possibility of answering questions that could lead to them being implicated in criminal activity that they had no way of being aware of. They are using their right to not answer questions that can lead to their criminal prosecution. Taking the fifth is mainly used in legal contexts such as interrogations by the police or through congressional hearings displaying their protection by the constitution to avoid leaking information that is detrimental to their prosecution.